New York Times Reporter Misrepresents Kansas Even After Being Given the Correct Info.
In her new article dumping on intelligent design, New York Times reporter Laurie Goodstein presents a fantasy version of the new Kansas science standards, claiming that "in Kansas last month, the board of education voted that students should be exposed to critiques of evolution like intelligent design."
Actually, the Board did no such thing. The Kansas science standards encourage students to learn about scientific criticisms of Darwin's theory. They do not ask for the teaching of alternatives to Darwin's theory such as intelligent design. Indeed, the Board included the following explicit statement in the standards:
"We also emphasize that the Science Curriculum Standards do not include Intelligent Design...." [emphasis added]
This isn't merely a case of sloppy reporting. When Ms. Goodstein interviewed me, I emphasized that the Kansas standards do not include intelligent design. I then sent her an e-mail making the same point. I even attached a copy of the relevant parts of the science standards so she could check for herself. Did she bother to read the document? If she did, what part of "Standards do not include Intelligent Design" didn't she understand?