Creationist Film at the Smithsonian:
Scientists Must Speak Up for Science

WASHINGTON - The American Geophysical Union, commenting on plans for the Smithsonian Institution to show a creationist film at one of its Washington, D.C., museums, says the showing will associate science with creationism and damage the Smithsonian's credibility. Writing in the 14 June issue of Eos, AGU's weekly newspaper for its 43,000 members, Executive Director Fred Spilhaus says the film's sponsor, the Discovery Institute, has a strategy of replacing "materialistic science" with "intelligent design." The film, A Privileged Planet, fosters the idea that science should include the supernatural. "This is unacceptable," Spilhaus says.

Spilhaus tells AGU's Earth and space scientist members that the scheduled 23 June event represents an opportunity to "express your point of view to members of the Smithsonian Board of Regents." He notes that the film is also being offered to PBS television stations. "It is important, Spilhaus says, "for each of us as scientists to speak up in defense of the integrity of science."

Following is the full text of the Eos article.

Speaking Up for Science

The Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History in Washington D.C. is planning to show a film, "A Privileged Planet" that promotes creationism in the form of "intelligent design." The film is based on the book by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Wesley Richards, both affiliated with the Discovery Institute, which advocates including "intelligent design" in U.S. public school science classes. By associating with the Discovery Institute, the Smithsonian Institution will associate science with creationism and damage its credibility. The film is slated for airing on 23 June, unless the Smithsonian comes to its senses.

Why is this important? Because the film promotes a long term strategy of the Discovery Institute (http://www.discovery.org/csc/) to replace "materialistic science" with "intelligent design." The film fosters the idea that science should include the supernatural. This is unacceptable. AGU's position is clear, creationism is not science and AGU opposes all efforts to promote creationism as science (The full text of the AGU position statement can be found at: http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/positions/evolution.shtml).

After a 28 May article in the New York Times, the museum took a positive step and withdrew its cosponsorship and refunded the Discovery Institute's $16,000, on the grounds that it "determined that the content of the film is not consistent with the mission of the Smithsonian Institution's scientific research." But it still plans to show the film, and it is unlikely that disclaimers, explanations, or excuses will prevent proponents of "intelligent design" from claiming legitimacy from their association with the Smithsonian Institution. It is analogous to the way creationists used the opportunity afforded by the presentation of posters at AGU's Fall Meeting in 2003 (http://www.icr.org/research/misc/aguconference.html).

In the film, several scientists are interviewed, and their interviews are weaved into interviews with "intelligent design" advocates, who talk about an ultimate meaning for our universe. The film's point is to raise the idea that the universe was designed for intelligent beings like humans, and further, that it was designed for us to discover things about it. That is legitimate as a philosophical or religious viewpoint, but it is not science.

This is an opportunity for you to express your point of view to members of the Smithsonian Board of Regents (http://www.si.edu/about/people.htm). The film is also being offered to PBS stations. If you notice that your local station puts it on the schedule, you may also want to contact it. It is important for each of us as scientists to speak up in the defense of the integrity of science.

--Fred Spilhaus, Executive Director

Citation: Spilhaus, F. (2005), Speaking Up For Science, Eos Trans. AGU, 86(24), 225.

# # #

Return to Services for the Media
Return to Starting Point