| Revision as of 01:53, 30 July 2007 editOrangemarlin (talk | contribs)30,771 edits Blogs are poor reference sources.← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:55, 30 July 2007 edit undoOrangemarlin (talk | contribs)30,771 edits →Analysis: Blogs should not be used a reference source. Other criticisms can be found.Next edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| ==Analysis== | ==Analysis== | ||
| Like other ], the statement has come under extensive criticism from a variety of sources as misleading, poorly phrased |
Like other ], the statement has come under extensive criticism from a variety of sources as misleading, poorly phrased and containing only a tiny fraction of professionals in relevant fields and representing an insignificant fraction of the total medical profession.{{cn}} | ||
| The compiled list of professionals is available on the Internet, where each signatory is listed 3 times, making the list seem artificially long. The signatories are listed by last name, by country and by specialty. Most of the doctors who signed the statement are from the United States. As of May 22, 2007 there were 224 signatories from the United States, 2 signatories from Australia, 4 signatories from Canada, 8 signatories from the United Kingdom and another 14 from 9 other countries. The signatories include doctors trained or working in a wide range of disciplines, including, ] medicine, ] (i.e., weight loss medicine), ], ], ], ],], ], ], ], ], and ]. | The compiled list of professionals is available on the Internet, where each signatory is listed 3 times, making the list seem artificially long. The signatories are listed by last name, by country and by specialty. Most of the doctors who signed the statement are from the United States. As of May 22, 2007 there were 224 signatories from the United States, 2 signatories from Australia, 4 signatories from Canada, 8 signatories from the United Kingdom and another 14 from 9 other countries. The signatories include doctors trained or working in a wide range of disciplines, including, ] medicine, ] (i.e., weight loss medicine), ], ], ], ],], ], ], ], ], and ]. | ||
Revision as of 01:55, 30 July 2007
Physicians and Surgeons who Dissent from Darwinism is a list of people agreeing with an anti-evolution statement produced by the Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity (PSSI), a nonprofit organization allegedly associated with the Discovery Institute, as an appeal to authority to support its viewpoint. This list is intended to bolster the Discovery Institute's claims that intelligent design is scientifically valid by creating the impression that evolution lacks broad scientific support. It is similar to the Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns to discredit evolution.
The document itself has been the subject of controversy and extensive criticism from a variety of sources. The statement in the document has been branded as poorly worded, misleading and vague.
This campaign, like the Discovery Institute anti-evolution campaigns, has come under criticism for being misleading and anti-science. The list of signatories represents an insignificant fraction of medical professionals (about 0.02%). The evidence of evolution is not determined by petitions or polls, however, but by scientific evidence. This is the reason that, in biological science itself, the theory of evolution is overwhelmingly accepted.
Statement
The medical doctors and comparable professionals are signatories to a statement which disputes evolution, which they refer to as "Darwinian macroevolution" or Darwinism, which are both misleading terms. The statement that the organization subscribes to is titled "Physicians and Surgeons who Dissent from Darwinism" and contains the following text:
"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the origination and complexity of life and we therefore dissent from Darwinian macroevolution as a viable theory. This does not imply the endorsement of any alternative theory."
Evolutionary synthesis and the theory of evolution state that inherited traits become more or less common due to non-random natural selection and random genetic drift, as well as other mechanisms. Therefore, the PSSI statement is overly vague and worded in a misleading fashion, since few real evolutionary biologists would subscribe to the version of evolution presented by the statement. In addition, evolution does not include the study of the origin of life, as the statement implies. Moreover, the distinction between macroevolution and microevolution is drawn primarily by creationists or those unfamiliar with the study of evolution.
The wording of this statement is very similar to the wording of the Discovery Institute's petition, "A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism", which has been widely criticized for being inaccurate and misleading.
History
The Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity was formed by the Discovery Institute in 2006. By May 8, 2006, the PSSI Dissent petition had 34 signatories.
Analysis
Like other Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns, the statement has come under extensive criticism from a variety of sources as misleading, poorly phrased and containing only a tiny fraction of professionals in relevant fields and representing an insignificant fraction of the total medical profession.
The compiled list of professionals is available on the Internet, where each signatory is listed 3 times, making the list seem artificially long. The signatories are listed by last name, by country and by specialty. Most of the doctors who signed the statement are from the United States. As of May 22, 2007 there were 224 signatories from the United States, 2 signatories from Australia, 4 signatories from Canada, 8 signatories from the United Kingdom and another 14 from 9 other countries. The signatories include doctors trained or working in a wide range of disciplines, including, addiction medicine, bariatrics (i.e., weight loss medicine), dentistry, dermatology, hospice care, opthamology,optometry, plastic surgery, psychiatry, radiology, urology, and veterinary medicine.
The American Medical Association estimates that in 2006, there were more than 884,000 physicians in the United States. In addition, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics estimated that in May of 2003 the US had 97,090 dentists, 63,780 opticians, 22,740 optometrists and 43,890 veterinarians.
Therefore, the total number of US professionals in the fields represented by the "Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity" Dissent petition is at least 1,111,500. That is, the 224 US signatories of the statement represent approximately 0.02% of the total number of US professionals in these fields.
However, this figure should be expected to rise, based on a poll of 1472 US physicians conducted by the "Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research" at the Jewish Theological Seminary and HCD Research in Flemington, New Jersey, from May 13-15, 2005. This study showed that 34% of physician respondents felt more comfortable with intelligent design than evolution.
By contrast, the Discovery Institute's Access Research Network claims that this same poll shows that 60 percent of physicians are skeptical of macroevolution: These are the figures quoted by the Discovery Institute's Evolution News and Views:
Jewish doctors: 32% reject Darwinism.
Protestant doctors (largest group of U.S. doctors): 81% reject Darwinism.
Catholic doctors: 78% reject Darwinism.
Orthodox Christian doctors: 72% reject Darwinism.
Hindu doctors: 54% reject Darwinism.
Buddhist doctors: 43% reject Darwinism (compared to 36% who accepted it)
Muslim doctors: 86% reject Darwinism.
Atheist doctors: 2% reject Darwinism.
"Spiritual but no organized religion": 48% reject Darwinism.
"Other": 54% reject Darwinism.
The reason for the apparent discrepancy is because of the way the questions were phrased, and the lumping of the largest group of respondents, those who subscribe to theistic evolution, in with the group rejecting "Darwinism".
References
- Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals. A Position Paper from the Center for Inquiry, Office of Public Policy Barbara Forrest. May, 2007.
- "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution", according to Brian Alters, as quoted in Finding the Evolution in Medicine, Cynthia Delgado, NIH Record, July 28, 2006.
- ^ Poor Orac, Tara C. Smith, Aetiology, scienceblogs, May 8, 2006
- Doubting Darwinism through Creative License, Skip Evans, National Center for Science Education, 11/29/2001
- Few Biologists But Many Evangelicals Sign Anti-Evolution Petition Kenneth Chang. The New York Times, February 21 2006 (paid subscription required, text available at Skeptical News)
- The Evolution Wars Visit Eye on Science, Michael Lemonick, Eye on Science, Time-Blog, February 21, 2007 12:20
- Wedging Creationism into the Academy Barbara Forrest, Glenn Branch, Academe Online, American Association of University Professors, May, 2005
- Physician Characteristics and Distribution in the US, 2006, American Medical Association, ISBN#: 1-57947-682-1
- May 2003 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations, US Bureau of Labor Statistics
- Majority of Physicians Give the Nod to Evolution Over Intelligent Design, HCD Research press release, May 23, 2005
- Data from HCD and Finkelstein Institute study of physician attitudes to evolution
- 2006 Year-end Report, Dennis Wagner, editor, ARN-Announce, Number Sixty-two, December 15, 2006.
- New Darwin Dissent List for the 60% of U.S. Doctors Skeptical of Darwinian Evolution: List Involves No Commitment to the Theory of Intelligent Design, Evolution News and Views, Discovery Institute, May 4, 2006
See also
- A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism
- A Scientific Support for Darwinism
- Level of support for evolution
- Clergy Letter Project
- Project Steve
External links
- Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity, official website
- PSSI Darwin Dissenters, official list