Search Religion News

Show summaries

Religion News
Israeli News

Top News Stories
U.S. Political News
Canadian News

Christian Magazines
Link To Us

Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content
Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

Religion News
 You're here » News Main Index » Religion News
Religion News
Printer friendly version
Email page to a friend
Link to this story

Evolutionist Admits False Assertions Against Critic of Darwin's Theories

by By Jim Brown
August 1, 2005
Like This Page?

(AgapePress) - The head of a pro-evolution think tank has issued a retraction for factual misstatements and false allegations she made in an article attacking a California man who wants the scientific weaknesses of Darwin's theory of evolution taught in public school science classes.

In her retraction, director Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) conceded that she wrongly accused Roseville attorney Larry Caldwell of submitting two books on young-Earth creation to the local school board for adoption -- one of which was published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Scott also admits to erroneously claiming that a science expert found Caldwell to have "a gross misunderstanding of the nature of science."

Scott's retraction comes after Caldwell filed a libel lawsuit against the director and against the NCSE over the recent article she wrote, which was published in California Wild: the Magazine of the California Academy of Sciences, and which contained the false statements at the heart of the lawsuit. Caldwell says he was gratified to learn that the California Academy of Sciences was willing to publish the retraction. He feels even pro-evolution scientists must realize that the integrity of their position is at stake when false allegations and misinformation take the place of fair, rational, and well-informed debate.

As the target of Scott's error-filled article, the California attorney says he hopes the settlement of his libel suit against her will change the way the pro-Darwin crowd approaches the controversy over evolution and science education. "When the Darwinists aren't sticking to the truth in public debates," he says, "it's causing people to start to question the claims they're making about evolution in the classroom."

What Caldwell is hoping, he adds, is that the proponents of Darwin's theories will realize the need to stick to the truth. That is essential, he says, "because this debate over how we teach evolution in public biology classes is just way too important to have it decided on the basis of false statements and what I call 'science fiction.'"

While some critics have suggested that evolution science advocates try to shut down debate over alternate theories by discrediting their proponents, that tactic has apparently not worked in Caldwell's case. Ironically, the Roseville man points out, Dr. Scott has credited his libel suit with sparking an "absolute explosion" of evolution debates around the country.

Jim Brown, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.

Discuss this article in the ChristiansUnite Discussion Forums

Back to Religion News Headlines.

More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | Site Map | Statement of Beliefs

Copyright © 1999-2019 All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

NOTE: News and information presented on this web site is for informational purposes only. does not necessarily endorse the views and opinions expressed.