Screwed-up book from the National Center for Science Education

An NCSE website article about a new book, "Evolution v. Creationism: An Introduction, 2nd Edition," by Eugenie Scott, says,

Evolution education is being battered every day in school districts across the U.S. by creationists, whether they're pushing young-earth creationism, intelligent design, or antievolutionism in the guise of "academic freedom."

Not all of the batterers are creationists.

What's going on here?

Good question.

Why is the United States the only country where teaching evolution is so controversial?

Wrong -- see this blog's articles about the evolution controversies abroad -- these articles are in two post-label groups listed in the sidebar of the homepage. How can the NCSE claim to have expertise in this area while being ignorant of such basic facts about the subject?

Why are scientists so sure that evolution is good science?

Some scientists are not so sure.

Are people of faith truly unable to accept the central principle of modern biology?

There we go again with that "evolution is central to biology" bullshit. Sheeesh.

Is it really "fair" for creationism to be taught alongside evolution?

One thing is for sure and that it is that it is "fair" to teach scientific and pseudoscientific criticisms of evolution alongside evolution.

What have the courts said?

It's not all bad, but a lot of it is bad -- very bad.

And will attacks on evolution ultimately undermine not only American education but American competitiveness?

K-12 evolution education has nothing to do with American competitiveness.

Updated, revamped, and expanded, the 2nd edition adds another 70 pages of brand new and revised material, including:

A new foreword by U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III, who ruled in the landmark Kitzmiller v. Dover case.

This has got to be the living end. Probably some crap about "judicial independence."

A new chapter on testing intelligent design and evidence against evolution in the courts.

The courts should rule that the scientific merits of both evolution and criticisms of evolution are non-justiciable. A question is considered non-justiciable when there is "a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving the question." Vieth v. Jubelirer, 541 U.S. 267 (2004). If necessary, Congress should use its power under the Constitution's Article III to strip the Supreme Court of appellate jurisdiction over scientific questions in the evolution controversy (with the exception of Supreme Court rulings that such questions are non-justiciable).

Evolution vs. Creationism is the perfect resource for teachers, professors, libraries, and anybody who wants to learn about the perennial creationism/evolution controversy.

It is also an extremely biased resource that needs to be balanced with opposing material.

The book did get some praise from a leading creationist:

Henry M. Morris in the Institute for Creation Research's Back to Genesis:

I believe that she has conscientiously tried to be objective in discussing this inflammatory subject in her book. ... The book is well written and creationists can read it with interest and appreciation, even though its arguments for evolution are — to us, at least — speculative and even defensive.

The book may be OK for creationists, but it is certainly not OK for supporters of scientific criticisms of evolution. Even the book's title, "Evolution v. Creationism," is biased, because as I indicated, creationism is not the only idea opposed to evolution.
.