Bruce Chapman, president of Discovery Institute, responds here to Laurie Goodstein’s piece “Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker” (blogged here). Note his point that “none of the critics quoted in your article supported the theory in the past” — Goodstein gave the impression that these critics had once been sympathetic to ID and then had become disillusioned. No, they were never on board.
December 10, 2005
To the Editor:
Contrary to “Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker” (Week in Review, Dec. 4), more scientists than ever support intelligent design and criticize Darwinism. A recent European conference on intelligent design – held in Prague and ignored by The Times – attracted 700 attendees, and featured leading scientists from Britain, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, as well as the United States.
At home, recent articles in The Wall Street Journal and Knight Ridder papers have described intelligent-design scientists at major universities (including Iowa State, the University of Minnesota and the University of Georgia). One National Public Radio story alone featured 18 intelligent-design scientists, though most “would not speak on the record for fear of losing their jobs.” There is far more support, indeed, than appears on the surface.
Meanwhile, the number of scientists who have signed Discovery Institute’s “Dissent From Darwin” list has now passed 470.
Yes, there is strong, organized opposition to intelligent design, but that is nothing new. To my knowledge, none of the critics quoted in your article supported the theory in the past. So their opposition now is hardly a surprise.
President, Discovery Institute
Seattle, Dec. 5, 2005