Brian Alters is in vehement opposition of teaching creationism and intelligent design in scientific classrooms. Recently, U of T biology students had the opportunity to hear him speak about the issues surrounding evolution.
Macroevolution is the theory that all organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool. Current species are merely one stage in the process of evolution, and their diversity can be accounted for by much speciation and extinction. In diametric opposition, Creationism maintains that a deity created the universe, and all that is in it. Another creationist tautology is that the Earth is thousands—rather than billions—of years old, a viewpoint that differs from the scientific community.
During his humourous presentation, Alters illuminated the role of creationism and its impact on the general population. The talk focused on the unscientific nature of creationism theory, and its misplacement in scientific classrooms. He showed a video illustrating that many accept intelligent design as a comfortable mix of science and religion. However, the number of people who accept the theory of intelligent design is not the issue for Alters. As illustrated in the controversial book, Of Pandas and People, religion has begun to permeate the domain of science. Alters made it clear that he believes domains for religion, such as temples, churches, and mosques, should remain separate from domains for science, namely classrooms.
Alters used the example of creationist-based museums, which display, among other things, exhibits in which dinosaurs and humans coexist, a phenomenon that never actually happened. He also explained the arguments on both sides of the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area District trial, in which he served as an expert witness. In 2005, Tammy Kitzmiller and eleven other parents successfully sued the Dover Area School District over its decision to present intelligent design as an alternative explanation to evolution.
During the question-and-answer period, Alters emphasized that people reject evolution because it undermines their faith. For many, accepting evolution might mean they having nothing to fall back on. Alters noted that “people do want to believe they will see their children again after they pass away, or their parents, or they want to know they will be rewarded for their good deeds.”
However, the two concepts do not have to be mutually exclusive. Alters cites an evolutionary biologist who believes very strongly in evolution, but states that it does not prevent him from believing in Islam. The resistance to new ideas can be a combination of scientific illiteracy, religious illiteracy and, most importantly, fear. In Alters’ view, it is difficult for the average person to grasp these concepts in such great depth.
In addition, the idea of evolution may not be accepted simply because it seems absurd at face value. “Suppose you told people two hundred years ago that you would take some dinosaur goo and metal, some guys are gonna get in, fly to the moon, put a flag on and play golf, come back out and become Senator!” says Alters. “Who would believe you?”
The field of evolutionary biology has many implications in society. According to Alters, “AIDS could probably be cured by evolutionary biology.” However, research is usually based on human needs and what is lucrative, and determining where life originated has no spin-off value. For this reason, research is not as focused on creating life in a lab as it is on finding new kinds of resistance to bacteria.
Alters discussed the creationism vs. evolution debate on a larger scale, explaining how it resonates differently in different parts of the world. France is particularly secular and has little problem with an anti-evolution stance. In China, there is no trouble with creationism at all—it is simply not allowed. Currently, Alters is conducting research in the Middle East and Pakistan, investigating the role of religion in early and later education. It seems that education at the middle and high school levels has many religious references and the Quran is interwoven with scientific facts. However, at the university level there is much more of a separation between religion and science, as topics are generally examined more objectively. What accounts for this difference? Alter noted that the scientific community does not allow religious undertones in publications, and that universities would lose credibility if they incorporated religion into scientific publications. Access to this type of information is particularly difficult due a sensitivity towards religious questioning.
Raised fundamentally Christian, Alters grew up thinking evolution was “bad” and was amazed at the strong clash of opinions about the issue. He attended Christian elementary and high schools before joining a seminary. His upbringing and the disputes to which he was exposed pushed him towards studying evolutionary biology at the University of Southern California, and completing a PhD in science education. He has written several biology textbooks and is a co-author of Defending Evolution, which aims to teach evolution effectively, despite recent controversies.
