Why would Brazilians want to hear from a chemist who thinks there is design in nature?

A friend from Brazil has been writing to tell me that the Brazilian Association for the Advancement of Science cancelled a lecture by chemist Marcos N Eberlin, Prof Dr Universidade Estadual de Campinas - UNICAMP (State University of Campinas) Instituto de Química (Institute of Chemistry) when they discovered that he might be talking about the design of our universe. Now Eberlin writes to say,

I sent the organizers the title of my talk and a resume. They accept it and added the talk to the scientific program. For two weeks my talk was advertized in the SBPC 2008 reunion website (see program enclosed) for Tuesday 15 10:30h (Terça Feira = Tuesday).

Yesterday I got an email for the organization saying simply and rudely that my talk had been cancelled! No explanations, no excuses… I then asked for a explanation, and they said ID is religion in the board of directors SBPC opinion and that is why they cancelled my talk. I let them know how erroneous they are and that ID is Science in its essence and that people would know no intelligence is allowed also at the SBPC meetings but as usual they were inflexible.
So that is the story. I think we should let everybody knows how scientific organizations are acting … people have the right to know.

I have a few other talks about ID in public universities here in Brazil scheduled for the 2nd semester, lets see if they will act to cancel these talks also… I hope not.

Dr. Eberlin, don't be surprised if other talks are suddenly cancelled. Always remember that your local adminbots need the idea that there is no design in nature - it provides the perfect excuse for their frightened stampede round the file cabinets.

They do not show intelligence because - intelligence does not exist anyway!

I hope you get a chance to give your lecture in Canada. Some here would like to hear it.

Amazon.dot.watchit!: Brazilian group monitors textbooks

One thing that has really inflated the intelligent design controversy has been random acts of Darwinism in taxpayer funded textbooks: historical distortions, slams at traditional philosophies, announcements that life has no meaning or purpose, gross inflation of the significance of various findings and inappropriate hagiography of Darwin... The main reason ID embryologist Jonathan Wells became so widely hated was his exposure of American textbooks.

In Brazil, an ID-friendly group has taken a proactive position, undertaking to analyze books and get corrections for subsequent editions before it all gets out of hand. Here, here, and here, in Portuguese, are some examples.

Enezio E. de Almeida Filho, who operates the blog Pos-darwinista, writes to say that in 2003 and 2005, his group sent a critical analysis of origin of life and evolution in seven major biology high school textbooks to the Brazilian Education Ministry group. This year, they are planning a critical analysis of all books (about 10) approved by the Brazilian Education Ministry specialists, which they will forward to the ministry.

According to Enezio, a very prominent author – José Mariano Amabis – a Ph. D. professor at USP (University of São Paulo – a Brazilian Ivy league university) has already removed two questionable items from his textbook ( Haeckel’s embryos and the Manchester moths ), though he did not give a reason. Other textbook authors are reportedly becoming more cautious and the Ministry has now appointed specialists to have a look at new books. A good idea, that.

Essentially, students must and should learn about Darwinian evolution - its strengths and weaknesses as an explanation for various features of life - but there is absolutely no justification for textbooks to read like the Holy Scriptures of Darwinism, complete with Darwinian miracle stories.

My other blog is the Mindful Hack, which keeps tabs on neuroscience and the mind.

If you like this blog, check out my book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.

Are you looking for one of the following stories?

My U of Toronto talk on why there is an intelligent design controversy, or my talk on media coverage of the controversy att he University of Minnesota.

A summary of tech guru George Gilder's arguments for ID and against Darwinism

A critical look at why March of the Penguins was thought to be an ID film.

A summary of recent opinion columns on the ID controversy

A summary of recent polls of US public opinion on the ID controversy

A summary of the Catholic Church's entry into the controversy, essentially on the side of ID.

O'Leary's intro to non-Darwinian agnostic philosopher David Stove’s critique of Darwinism.

An ID Timeline: The ID folk seem always to win when they lose.

O’Leary’s comments on Francis Beckwith, a Dembski associate, being granted tenure at Baylor after a long struggle - even after helping in a small way to destroy the Baylor Bears' ancient glory - in the opinion of a hyper sportswriter.

Why origin of life is such a difficult problem.

Blog policy note:Comments are permitted on this blog, but they are moderated. Fully anonymous posts and URLs posted without comment are rarely accepted. To Mr. Anonymous: I'm not psychic, so if you won't tell me who you are, I can't guess and don't care. To Mr. Nude World (URL): If you can't be bothered telling site visitors why they should go on to your fave site next, why should I post your comment? They're all busy people, like you. To Mr. Rudeby International and Mr. Pottymouth: I also have a tendency to delete comments that are merely offensive. Go be offensive to someone who can smack you a good one upside the head. That may provide you with a needed incentive to stop and think about what you are trying to accomplish. To Mr. Righteous but Wrong: I don't publish comments that contain known or probable factual errors. There's already enough widely repeated misinformation out there, and if you don't have the time to do your homework, I don't either. To those who write to announce that at death I will either 1) disintegrate into nothingness or 2) go to Hell by a fast post, please pester someone else. I am a Catholic in communion with the Church and haven't the time for either village atheism or aimless Jesus-hollering.