| Revision as of 03:39, 18 February 2008 editGood Olfactory (talk | contribs)688,950 edits place in subcategory← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:32, 1 March 2008 edit undoChmsprg (talk | contribs)1 edit Deleted text because this was an ad hominem smear job. Disgusting.Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{otheruses4|the ] advocate|other people named Jonathan Wells|Jonathan Wells}} | |||
| '''John Corrigan "Jonathan" Wells''' is an American author, a prominent promoter of ] and an opponent of ]<ref name="Icons intro">"Biological evolution is the theory that all living things are modified descendants of a common ancestor that lived in the distant past. It claims that you and I are descendants of ape-like ancestors, and that they in turn came from still more primitive animals...much of what we teach about evolution is wrong. This fact raises troubling questions about the status of Darwinian evolution. If the icons of evolution are supposed to be our best evidence for Darwin's theory, and all of them are false or misleading, what does that tell us about the theory? Is it science, or myth?" --Jonathan Wells, </ref>, which Wells and other intelligent design proponents often refer to as "]."<ref name="wells_PIGDID">"In order to advance his thesis, Wells has to convey the idea that "Darwinism" pits itself against traditional Christianity: to allow pupils to learn it is to give them up to atheism, decadence, liberalism and to lose the culture war. Note that Wells does not wage war against evolution. In fact, he is at pains to make it (somewhat) clear that he wages war against "Darwinism", which in context might sound like the sort of thing any sensible Christian would want to guard against. Unfortunately, Wells isn’t exactly clear what he means by Darwinism as opposed to evolution. Easily, one of the prominent faults of Wells’s screed is a pervasive confusion between terms. Words, like "Darwinism" and "Traditional Christianity", seem to mean whatever Wells wants them to mean for that specific sentence. In many cases words are used without regard for his own stated definitions and usually without regard to usage elsewhere in his book. There are several possible reasons for this confusion in terms. First, Wells confusion may be by design. I have argued elsewhere that creationists intend to confuse their audiences when they argue. Second, if you review the acknowledgements page, you’ll read how Wells used many authors to help him prepare this text. It is possible that Wells’s editorship was so insufficient that he allowed a term that makes up part of the book’s very title to have a flexible meaning. My suspicion is that there was both disparity between the understanding of key terms by different authors as well as an intention to confuse." {{cite web| url = http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/08/the_politically_1.html| title = The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design Review: Why Should Words Have Meanings? (Chapter 1)| accessdate = 2007-02-04| last = Humburg| first = Burt| date = August 26, 2006| work = ]| quote = }}</ref><ref name="Forrest">"As I stated earlier, Johnson, Dembski, and their associates have assumed the task of destroying 'Darwinism,' 'evolutionary naturalism,' 'scientific materialism,' 'methodological naturalism,' 'philosophical naturalism,' and other 'isms' they use as synonyms for evolution." Barbara Forrest. March 2000. Quoted in William A. Dembski. May 14 2005</ref><ref name="Gross">"In latest Commentary essay on 'Darwinism' - as it is often called by those who do not know much evolutionary biology..." {{cite journal | quotes = no | last = Gross | first = Paul R. | authorlink = Paul R. Gross | date = March 2003 | title = Darwinism versus intelligent design | journal = Commentary Magazine | volume = 115 | issue = 3 | pages = | url = http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001692848&er=deny | accessdate = 2007-02-05}}</ref> | |||
| In his book, '']'', Wells says that ] conflicts with the evidence, and argues against its teaching in ]<ref>"Several of them grossly exaggerate or distort the truth, while others are patently false. Yet they are found year after year in almost all textbooks dealing with evolutionary theory, and they invariably accompany other material promoting that theory. When someone points out that the textbook examples misrepresent the facts, Darwinists don’t rush to correct them. Instead, they rush to defend them." , Jonathan Wells, June 12, 2002, posted at Discovery Institute website, accessed August 13, 2007</ref> However, his views on evolution, as well as AIDS, run counter to ] on evolution and the causal link between HIV and AIDS, skeptics of which are known as the ] movement.<ref name="science_yet"/><ref>National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science.…It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom." National Science Teachers Association Press Release ] ] | |||
| <br> Journal of Clinical Investigation 116:1134-1138 American Society for Clinical Investigation, 2006. | |||
| <br> University of Cape Town, Centre for Social Science Research. (PDF file) | |||
| <br>{{cite news | first=PZ | last=Myers | authorlink=PZ Myers | title=Ann Coulter: No evidence for evolution? | date=2006-06-18 | publisher=] | url =http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/06/ann_coulter_no_evidence_for_ev.php | work =Pharyngula | pages = | accessdate = 2006-11-18}} | |||
| <br>National Association of Biology Teachers | |||
| <br> Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the ] ] (PDF file) | |||
| <br>From the ], the world's largest general scientific society: (PDF file), | |||
| </ref> Wells rejects evolution in favor of intelligent design<ref name="Icons intro" /> and denies the causal link between the human immunodeficiency virus (]) and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (]).<ref name=group></ref><ref>"His personal peculiarities include membership in the Moonies and support for AIDS reappraisal - the theory that the HIV is not the primary cause of AIDS" Beth Quittman. Seattlest, September 8, 2006.</ref><ref name="vancouver sun">"some leading lights of anti-evolution Intelligent Design theory, including ID godfather Phillip Johnson and Moonie Jonathan Wells, have joined the AIDS denialist camp." Peter McKnight. Originally published in the Vancouver Sun, June 17, 2006.</ref><ref name="science_yet"> Matthew J. Brauer, Barbara Forrest, Steven G. Gey. Washington University Law Quarterly, Volume 83, Number 1, 2005. (PDF file)</ref> The ] overwhelmingly accepts evolution<ref>"99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution" ]</ref> and considers the causative role of HIV to be well proven and dissident arguments are the result of ]-driven ] and misrepresentation of predominantly outdated scientific data, with the potential to endanger ] by dissuading people from utilizing proven treatments.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Galea P, Chermann JC. | title = HIV as the cause of AIDS and associated diseases | journal = Genetica | volume = 104 | issue = 2 | pages = 133-142 | year = 1998 | id = PMID 10220906}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | author = Delaney M. | title = "The Duesberg phenomenon": Duesberg and other voices | journal = Science | volume = 267 | issue = 5196 | pages = 314 | year = 1995 | id = PMID 7824920}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | author = Watson J. | title = Scientists, activists sue South Africa's AIDS 'denialists' | journal = Nat Med. | volume = 12| issue = 1 | pages = 6| year = 2006 | id = PMID 16397537 }}</ref><ref>, by Sarah Boseley. Published in '']'' on ] ]. Accessed 9 Feb 2007.</ref><ref name="smu_aids_pseudoscience"> Department of Physics | |||
| Southern Methodist University.</ref> Intelligent design is widely characterized within the ] as ], as shown by numerous statements from ].<ref name="NCSE_Acad">e.g., "Repeatedly, old arguments, long since refuted, have been refurbished and presented to new audiences that are ill-equipped to evaluate them. Lately, creationist pseudoscience has been attempting to insinuate itself into the curriculum under the rubric of "intelligent design." Statement from the ], 1994. </ref><ref>Statement from the ]</ref><ref>"for most members of the mainstream scientific community, ID is not a scientific theory, but a creationist pseudoscience." David Mu. Harvard Science Review, Volume 19, Issue 1, Fall 2005.</ref> | |||
| ==Background== | |||
| After dropping out of college (where he was majoring in ]) and working as a ] driver in ], Wells was drafted into the ], serving from 1964 to 1966. After returning to college at ], he was ordered to reserve duty. Being by that time a critic of the ], he refused to report for duty and was incarcerated for 18 months at the ].<ref>"I eventually dropped out of school and drove a taxicab in New York City until receiving my draft notice in 1964. After spending two years in the U. S. Army, I transferred to the University of California at Berkeley. By then I was a critic of the Vietnam War, and when the Army called me back as a reservist in 1967 I refused. I was arrested by military police, court-martialed, and sent to Leavenworth. All together, I spent a year and half in prison." , The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design website</ref> | |||
| In the 1970s Wells joined Reverend ]'s ]. He graduated from the church's ] in 1978 with a Masters in Religious Education.<ref name="NNDB">{{cite news | url=http://www.nndb.com/people/578/000118224/ | title=NNDB:Jonathan Wells|publisher=] | date=2006 | first= | last= | accessdate = 2006-12-28}} </ref> He has since written extensively on ] and since 1981 has taught from time to time at the Unification Theological Seminary.<ref>Jonathan Wells (1997) , ''Journal of Unification Studies'' hosted at www.tparents.org</ref>Wells worked for the Unification Theological Seminary until 1996. The president of the school, David S.C. Kim, said Wells had made a great contribution to the school's development.<ref> Meeting notes posted at tparents.org, a Unification Church website</ref> Wells has written on the subject of ] within the Unification Church <ref></ref> and has been called a "Unification Church marriage expert" by church sources. <ref></ref> He is married and has two children. <ref></ref> | |||
| In 1986 Wells earned a PhD in Religious Studies at ].<ref name="nndb,wells"/> He then returned to UC Berkeley where in 1994 he was awarded a PhD in Molecular and Cell Biology.<ref name=nndb,wells/> Shortly after completing his doctorate, Wells joined former UC Berkeley law professor ], father of the ], at the ].<ref name=rnaworld,id> Peter Gegenheimer. Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of Kansas-Lawrence. Associate Professor of Molecular Biosciences. Lawrence KS USA</ref><ref name=nndb,wells></ref> After receiving his doctorate, he worked as a post-doctoral researcher in ];<ref name=wells,2ndPhD>{{ cite web | url = http://www.tparents.org/library/unification/talks/wells/DARWIN.htm | year=1996 | accessdate=2007-08-10 | title=Why I Went for a Second PhD | quote = I have taught embryology at a state college and am now a post-doctoral research biologist at Berkeley, writing articles critical of Darwinism.}}</ref> however it is alleged that this was an unpaid position arranged<ref name=rnaworld,id/> by Johnson. | |||
| Wells now serves as a fellow at the Discovery Institute's ], hub of the ], and at the ],<ref> Discovery Institute </ref> an organization that promotes intelligent design. | |||
| ==Opposition to evolution== | |||
| Of his early student days at Unification Theological Seminary (1976-78), Wells said, "One of the things that Father advised us to do at UTS was to pray to seek God's plan for our lives." He later described that plan: "To defend and articulate ] especially in relation to Darwinian evolution."<ref> Cornerstone, 1997.</ref> | |||
| Wells stated that his religious doctoral studies at Yale focused on the "root of the conflict between Darwinian evolution and Christian doctrine" and encompassed the whole of ] ] within a focus of Darwinian controversies. He said, "I learned (to my surprise) that biblical chronology played almost no role in the 19th-century controversies, since most theologians had already accepted geological evidence for the age of the earth and re-interpreted the days in ] as long periods of time. Instead, the central issue was design."<ref name="darwinism"> - Jonathan Wells, from tparents.org</ref> | |||
| Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church bankrolled Wells's education.<ref>, ]</ref><ref> Michelle Goldberg. Salon, January 10, 2005.</ref> Wells said that learning how to "destroy Darwinism," the term he and intelligent design proponents use to mean evolution<ref name="wells_PIGDID"/><ref name="Forrest"/><ref name="Gross"/> which is opposed by the Unification Church,<ref></ref><ref> ]. ], Volume 410, April 12, 2001.</ref><ref> "Under the Supervision of Sang Hun Lee." Unification Thought Institute, 1996.</ref><ref> ]. Times Books, 2006. Page 110</ref> was his motive for seeking his second Ph.D. at Berkeley: | |||
| {{quotation|"Father's <nowiki></nowiki> words, my studies, and my prayers convinced me that I should devote my life to destroying ], just as many of my fellow Unificationists had already devoted their lives to destroying ]. When Father chose me (along with about a dozen other seminary graduates) to enter a Ph.D. program in 1978, I welcomed the opportunity to prepare myself for battle." --Jonathan Wells, <cite>Darwinism: Why I Went for a Second Ph.D.</cite> <ref> Jonathan Wells. The Words of the Wells Family</ref>}} | |||
| Wells's statement and others like it are viewed by the scientific community as evidence that Wells lacks proper scientific ] and mischaracterizes evolution by ignoring and misrepresenting the evidence supporting it while pursuing an agenda promoting notions supporting his religious beliefs in its stead.<ref> John S. Wilkins. ] March 30, 2004.</ref><ref> ], ], January 24, 2007.</ref><ref> ], ], January 25, 2007.</ref><ref> ], ], November 3, 2006.</ref><ref>, ], ], January 31, 2007.</ref> ], having debated Wells, said Wells "clearly lied" during his debates and misrepresented his agenda and science.<ref>]. ''Denying Evolution: Creationism, Scientism, and the Nature of Science'' (Sinauer, 2002): ISBN 0878936599 page 44-45</ref> Moreover, Pigliucci wrote Wells simply does not understand some of the theories Wells tries to attack. The ] responded that "Darwinists have resorted to attacks on Dr. Wells’s religion"<ref name=realtruth> from the ].</ref>. | |||
| Wells has written a large number of articles attacking evolution and defending Intelligent Design.<ref name=discovery,search,wells>, ]</ref> He was one of the contributors to ]'s 2002 debate between ID advocates and evolution supporters.<ref>, ]</ref> | |||
| ===Icons of Evolution=== | |||
| {{main|Icons of Evolution}} | |||
| Wells is best known <ref> </ref><ref></ref><ref> | |||
| </ref> for his 2002 book '']'', in which he discusses ten examples which he says show that many of the most commonly accepted arguments supporting ] are invalid. Icons of Evolution has been called an "influential intelligent-design book."<ref></ref> | |||
| Wells's assertions and conclusion in this book, as well as in his other writings, are rejected by the ].<ref name=unscientific>See: 1) ] 2) ]. 3) The Discovery Institute's ] petition begun in 2001 has been signed by over 700 scientists as of ], ]. A four day ] petition gained 7733 signatories from scientists opposing ID. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and . More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators . on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism.</ref> Scholars quoted in the work have accused Wells' of purposely ] and misleading readers. Biology Professor ] wrote of ''Icons'', "Jonathan Wells' book rests entirely on a flawed ]: ... textbooks illustrate evolution with examples; these examples are sometimes presented in incorrect or misleading ways; therefore evolution is a fiction."<ref> ]. Answers In Science, ].</ref> | |||
| ===Theory of Organismal Problem-Solving=== | |||
| In a 2004 paper in the intelligent design journal '']'', Wells proposed his "Theory of Organismal Problem-Solving" (TOPS), which was intended to provide a mechanism by which intelligent design "could lead to new hypotheses and scientific discoveries". The idea is based on two fundamental assumptions, that "Darwinian evolution" is false, and that intelligent design is true. Rather than seeking experimental verification for intelligent design, TOPS "explore what happens when ID rather than evolutionary theory is used as a framework to ask research questions".<ref name = PCID>{{cite journal | quotes = no | last = Wells | first = Jonathan | date = 2004 | title = Using Intelligent Design Theory to Guide Scientific Research | journal = Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design | volume = 3.1 | url = http://www.iscid.org/papers/Wells_TOPS_051304.pdf | accessdate = 2007-02-05 }}</ref> | |||
| In the paper, Wells sought to apply this to ] and ]s. Wells stated that "cancer is not correlated with any consistent pattern of DNA mutations, but it ''is'' correlated with abnormalities at the chromosomal level -- a phenomenon called "chromosomal instability", and that many researchers see cancer as a "centrosomal disease" rather than a DNA disease. This led him to centrioles. Since centrioles ''look like'' turbines under ], Wells used the TOPS metholody to conclude that "if centrioles look like turbines they might actually be turbines".<ref name = PCID/> | |||
| In response to Wells's assertion that cancer was a disease of chromosomal instability and not genes, Ian Musgrave, writing in the ] replied that "this knowledge seems to have eluded most researchers in the field" and pointed out that where chromosomal translocations underlie cancer, "chromosomal instability can be traced to a mutation in a single gene".<ref name = FineMess>{{cite web| url = http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/07/thats_another_f.html| title = That’s another fine mess you’ve made Jonathan!| accessdate = 2007-02-05| last = Musgrave| first = Ian| date = July 6, 2005 | work = ]| quote = }}</ref> | |||
| ===Centrioles=== | |||
| Using the TOPS methodology, which assumes that intelligent design is true and "Darwinian evolution" is false, Wells revisited the issue of centrioles in a 2005 paper entitled "Do Centrioles Generate a Polar Ejection Force?" in Rivista di Biologia/Biology Forum.<ref></ref> Wells's paper "assumes that ]] are holistically designed to be turbines", and goes on to develop a hypothesis of how they work.<ref> Ian Musgrave. The Pandas Thumb, August 9, 2006.</ref> The ] lists this paper as a "featured article" on their list of "Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design."<ref> by the ]</ref> This has been challenged by History and Philosophy of Science professor John M. Lynch, who points out that Rivista di Biologia/Biology Forum is edited by Italian creationist ], whose own book ''Why Is a Fly Not a Horse?'' is published by the Discovery Institute,<ref> Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture.</ref> and largely publishes only research outside the general ]. Lynch said of Rivista: "While there may be interesting ideas here, there is no indication that they represent mainstream thought in biology. And while this might be an 'internationally respected biology journal' within certain (anti-Darwinian) communities, it cannot be considered so among the majority." and "the influence of Rivista, we see that - as one would expect from the above - the journal is of negligible importance at best ... in the case of Rivista could not reasonable be called 'internationally respected'."<ref name="stranger_fruit"> Dr. John Lynch. Stranger Fruit, June 2, 2005.</ref> The Discovery Institute's statement that Wells's paper is a peer reviewed article published in scientific journal runs counter to the testimony of intelligent design proponent Michael Behe in ] and the judge's findings and ruling.<ref name=kitzruling_pg88> ]</ref> | |||
| ===Kansas evolution hearings=== | |||
| {{main|Kansas evolution hearings}} | |||
| In 2005, Wells attended the ], which were ]ed by mainstream scientists. There Wells testifed, "I became convinced that the Darwinian theory is false because it conflicts with the evidence." When questioned about the ], he replied, "I think the earth is probably four-and-a-half billion or so years old. ... But the truth is I have not looked at the evidence. And I have become increasingly suspicious of the evidence that is presented to me and that's why at this point I would say probably it's four-and-a-half billion years old, but I haven't looked at the evidence."<ref name="TOKansas"> ].</ref> | |||
| Prior to the evolution hearings, in December 2000 after the ] school board revised its tenth-grade biology curriculum at the urging of intelligent design proponents to include material that encourages students to question the theory of evolution, the Pratt Tribune published a letter from ] challenging Wells's characterization in an article of his work on ], saying that his article appended to the Pratt standards was misused and being mischaracterized:<ref> Jerry Coyne. Pratt Tribune. December 200. Also available from the .</ref> | |||
| {{quotation|"Creationists such as Jonathan Wells claim that my criticism of these experiments casts strong doubt on Darwinism. But this characterization is false. ... My call for additional research on the moths has been wrongly characterized by creationists as revealing some fatal flaw in the theory of evolution. ... It is a classic creationist tactic (as exemplified in Wells's book, "Icons of Evolution") to assert that healthy scientific debate is really a sign that evolutionists are either committing fraud or buttressing a crumbling theory." -- ''Jerry Coyne, letter to the editor, Pratt Tribune.''}} | |||
| ===The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design=== | |||
| In 2006 Wells published his second major book, ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design'', which was part of a ] published by ]. The book was praised by ], author of ''The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science''<ref></ref>, but was described by Reed Cartwright of ] as being "not only politically incorrect but incorrect in most other ways as well: scientifically, logically, historically, legally, academically, and morally."<ref>{{cite news | url=http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/08/the_politically.html | title=The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design Review|publisher=] | date=August 19, 2006 | first= | last= | accessdate = 2006-11-04}}</ref> | |||
| == AIDS reappraisal == | |||
| {{main|AIDS reappraisal}} | |||
| Wells ]<ref name="vancouver sun"/> the consensus of the scientific community that HIV has been conclusively proved to be the sole cause of AIDS. In 1993 he signed the ''The Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis'' petition calling for a "reappraisal of the evidence" for the connection between HIV and AIDS.<ref name="group"/> | |||
| ==Publications== | |||
| ===Articles in peer-reviewed journals=== | |||
| *{{cite journal|author=Wells J|title=Inertial force as a possible factor in mitosis|journal=Biosystems|date=1985|volume=17|issue=4|pages=301-15|pmid= 3902112}} | |||
| *{{cite journal|author=Larabell CA, Rowning BA, Wells, J, Wu M, Gerhart JC|title=Confocal microscopy analysis of living Xenopus eggs and the mechanism of cortical rotation|journal=Development|date=1996|volume=122|issue=4|pages=1281-9|pmid=8620855}} | |||
| * Rowning BA, Wells J, Wu M, Gerhart JC, Moon RT, Larabell CA. . ''Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A''. 1997 Feb 18;94(4):1224-9. | |||
| ===Books=== | |||
| * ''Charles Hodge's Critique of Darwinism: An Historical-Critical Analysis of Concepts Basic to the 19th Century Debate''. Edwin Mellen Press, April 1988. ISBN 0889466718 and ISBN 978-0889466715 | |||
| * '']''. ]. 2000. ISBN 0-89526-276-2 | |||
| * '']''. ]. 2006. ISBN 1-59698-013-3 | |||
| * '']''. Co-author with ]. ]. 2007. ISBN 0980021308 | |||
| == External links == | |||
| * from the ] | |||
| * from the ] | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * from ] | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| ==References== | |||
| <!--See http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags--> | |||
| {{reflist|2}} | |||
| {{Pepperedmoth}} | |||
| {{Sun Myung Moon}} | |||
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Wells, Jonathan}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||