Discovery Institute Press is the institute's publishing arm[14] and has published intelligent design books by its fellows including David Berlinski's Deniable Darwin & Other Essays (2010), Jonathan Wells' The Myth of Junk DNA (2011) and an edited volume titled Signature Of Controversy, which contains apologetics in defense of the institute's Center for Science and Culture director Stephen C. Meyer.
Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity
The Physicians and Surgeons for Scientific Integrity (PSSI), formally registered as PSSI International Inc., is a United States 501(c)(3) nonprofit anti-evolution organization, based in Clearwater, Florida, promoting the pseudoscience of intelligent design associated with the Discovery Institute. While in the past, the organization sponsored events promoting intelligent design and fundamentalist Christianity, it is currently largely inactive.[15] The PSSI was established in early 2006 by Rich Akin.[16]Geoffrey Simmons, Discovery Institute fellow, is one of the directors of the PSSI.
The PSSI created a public list of medical professionals who dissent from Darwinism. This list is used by the Discovery Institute in its anti-evolution campaigns. The list is used in support of the Discovery Institute claims that intelligent design is scientifically valid while asserting that evolution lacks broad scientific support.[17]
The PSSI, which was active between 2006 and 2008, held a "Doctors Doubting Darwin" rally at the University of South Florida's Sun Dome in September 2006. Attendance was estimated at 3,500 to 4,000 people by a local reporter.[18] Apologetic organizations promoting the event had hoped to fill all 7,700 seats in the Sun Dome.[19][20] This meeting featured the Discovery Institute's Jonathan Wells and fellow Michael Behe, and received local radio coverage. This rally was opposed by the Florida Citizens for Science.[21][22]
The scientific community and science education organizations have replied that there is no scientific controversy regarding the validity of evolution and that the controversy is a religious and political one.[26][27][28] A federal court, along with the majority of scientific organizations, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, say the institute has manufactured the controversy they want to teach by promoting a "false perception" that evolution is "a theory in crisis" by falsely claiming it is the subject of wide controversy and debate within the scientific community.[26][27][29][30] In the December 2005 ruling of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Judge John E. Jones III concluded that intelligent design is not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents".[31]
The Wedge Strategy is a political and social action plan authored by the institute. The strategy was put forth in a Discovery Institute manifesto known as the "Wedge Document". Its goal is to change American culture by shaping public policy to reflect politically conservative fundamentalist evangelicalProtestant values. The wedge metaphor is attributed to Phillip E. Johnson and depicts a metal wedge splitting a log. In Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails) the authors wrote "Although its religious orientation is explicit, the long-term plan outlined in the Wedge Document also displays the Discovery Institute's political agenda very clearly. In ten years, the Wedge strategy was to be extended to ethics, politics, theology; the humanities, and the arts. The ultimate goal of the Discovery Institute is to "overthrow" materialism and "renew" American culture to reflect right-wing Christian values."[32]
The Center for Science and Culture (CSC), formerly known as the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC), is part of the Discovery Institute, beside other connected sites, such as Mind Matters,[33] operated by the non-profit Walter Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence[34] at Discovery Institute. It publishes the blog Evolution News & Science Today (formerly Evolution News & Views and often shortened to Evolution News (EN)), that promotes "a rigorously God-centered view of creation, including a new 'science' based solidly on theism."[35]
Other issues
Homelessness
Christopher Rufo, an activist who later became famous for opposing the teaching of critical race theory, wrote frequently on the subject of homelessness while he worked for the Discovery Institute.[36] In his 2018 Discovery Institute-funded policy paper "Seattle Under Siege: How Seattle's Homelessness Policy Perpetuates the Crisis and How We Can Fix It," Rufo said that four groups—"socialist intellectuals", "compassion brigades", the "homeless-industrial complex", and the "addiction evangelists"—had successfully framed the debate on homelessness and diverted funding to their projects.[37][38] He described how the "compassion brigade" had called for social justice using terms such as "compassion, empathy, bias, inequality, root causes, systemic racism."[38] Rufo brought negative attention to All Home, which at the time was King County, Washington's homelessness agency, by sharing a video of an adult entertainer performing at a conference on homelessness. All Home's director was placed on administrative leave and resigned shortly thereafter.[39]
Caitlin Bassett of the Discovery Institute has contributed opinion articles that criticize governmental response to homelessness as wasteful and counterproductive to the goal of ending homelessness. The Discovery Institute opposes the Housing First approach, preferring to prioritize treating homeless people for mental illness or drug addiction.[40]
^"Discovery Institute Press". Discovery Institute Press. Seattle, WA: Discovery Institute. Archived from the original on October 31, 2023. Retrieved May 5, 2014.
^"ID's home base is the Center for Science and Culture at Seattle's conservative Discovery Institute. Meyer directs the center; former Reagan adviser Bruce Chapman heads the larger institute, with input from the Christian supply-sider and former American Spectator owner George Gilder (also a Discovery senior fellow). From this perch, the ID crowd has pushed a "teach the controversy" approach to evolution that closely influenced the Ohio State Board of Education's recently proposed science standards, which would require students to learn how scientists "continue to investigate and critically analyze" aspects of Darwin's theory." Chris Mooney. The American Prospect. December 2, 2002 Survival of the Slickest: How anti-evolutionists are mutating their messageArchived 2005-04-05 at the Wayback Machine
^ ab"Some bills seek to discredit evolution by emphasizing so-called "flaws" in the theory of evolution or "disagreements" within the scientific community. Others insist that teachers have absolute freedom within their classrooms and cannot be disciplined for teaching non-scientific "alternatives" to evolution. A number of bills require that students be taught to "critically analyze" evolution or to understand "the controversy." But there is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution. The current controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution is not a scientific one." AAAS Statement on the Teaching of EvolutionArchived 2006-02-21 at the Wayback Machine American Association for the Advancement of Science. February 16, 2006
^"ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard." Ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, page 89
