今天在纽约时报上看到一片有关进化论冲突的文章，翻译过来给大家看。――译者
最近在进化论方面有个小冲突，宣扬要减弱进化论教学的鼓动者提出有514名科学家和工程师签名的请愿书。
在这个请愿书里面，他们说他科学的证明了对坚持进化论的怀疑。但是随便采访了一下在请愿书里面签字的20个人以及公开发表这些论述的十多人就发现其实这些人都是福音派新教会的基督徒，他们反对进化论是出于他们的宗教信仰。甚至于这个请愿书的发起人，西雅图发现研究院，说只有四分之一的签名者是与进化论相关的生物学家。其他签名者包括76个化学家，75个工程师，63个物理学家和24个医药学教授。
该研究院于2001年开始操作此请愿书，他支持智能设计作为一种代替进化论的“教学论战”已接近此目的，就象上星期在俄亥俄州教育董事会撤掉的东西一样。
研究院官方说有42个人是在12月一个联邦法官对多佛尔一个Pa学区试图用智能设计来代替进化论执行反对裁决后签的名（将名字加入请愿书）。
“早先批评者认为只有丛林里面的生活的土包子才不相信达尔文的理论，” 学院的院长布鲁斯*查普曼说，“有多少显而易见是少数-10，50，100，500？”
查普曼先生说请愿书显示“少数科学家不认可达尔文理论，并且不仅仅是少得可怜”。
请愿书没有提及智能设计，即认为生命是如此复杂，最好按智能设计论来解释，它指出“我们怀疑生命复杂多样来源于自然选择及突变进化，小心求证达尔文的理论要有勇气”。
一个签满了名字的请愿书昨天发布在网上，网址为：dissentfromdarwin.org。签字者都声称获得科学或工程博士头衔。名单中有全国著名科学家如赖斯（Rice） 大学的化学教授James M. Tour，马萨诸塞州理工学院计算所主任Rosalind W. Picard及国家科学院宾夕法尼亚州名誉化学教授Philip S. Skell。
也有一些中性职位的签名者，比如工作在俄亥俄州，德拉瓦的为公众工作的一个主任Thomas H. Marshall，他有环境生态学博士学位。发现学院说有128位签字者有生物科学学位，26位有生物化学学位。有超过350位非生物学家，包括Tour博士Picard博士和Skell博士。
签字的128位生物学家绝少涉及生命形成历史领域问题。
作为福音派新教会的基督徒的签字者，绝大部分为他们在科学基础的怀疑辩护但同时说进化论与他们的信仰不符。有些说当他们增加进教堂的活动时就开始怀疑，有的说按圣经字面来看不仅怀疑进化论而且也怀疑那些显示宇宙和地球有几十亿年的地质学和宇宙学。
纽约波茨坦Clarkson大学的数学和计算机科学的教授Scott R. Fulton也签了名，他说为智能设计论争执“非常有趣有前途”。
他说他认为他的的宗教信仰是“不显著相关”，他判断智能设计论为“它可能在感觉上使我对这些问题很感兴趣”，他说“当我看到科学证据指向上帝时，我觉得很受鼓舞”。
奥本的家禽科学教授Roger J. Lien说他从一个基督徒朋友那收到一份请愿书副本。
“我把我的名字贴上去”他说“基本上我相信这些。”
Lien博士说他成长于一个不是很相信宗教的一个加利福尼亚家庭，他在他的科学生涯中接受进化论。他说他变成基督徒大约在10年前，六年后他加入了奥本学院。
“这个世界支离破碎，而我们的科学家不能修复它”，Lien博士说“我被带到基督耶稣、上帝和神创论面前并开始相信圣经。”他同时说他认为进化论是“和圣经所说矛盾”。
另一个签字者：南伊利诺斯州大学医学院的细胞生物学教授Gregory J. Brewer博士。象其他怀疑论者一样，他愿意接受他所说的“微进化”物种在它们所处环境中适应变化的能力。但是他保留观点认为科学还没有证明一个物种可以进化到另外一个物种。
“我认为进化论里有很多问题，” Brewer博士说，他不接受科学界认为宇宙已经有几十亿的年龄。“从科学角度来说，我认为有另外一种可能，一个就是智能设计。基于信念，我相信创造分类”。
开发“纳米轿车”-一种单分子造型的轿车，带有四个滚轮的开发者Tour博士说他对进化论保留开放思想。
“我尊敬那项工作，” Tour博士说，他把自己描述成犹太救世主，他把基督当弥赛亚来信。
他说他在化学和纳米技术里的经验让他觉得使原子和分子机动非常困难。他说，他发现很难相信这种细胞机器能通过随机过程来生产。他说，进化论的解释不完整。
“我不能制造跳跃，如他们所解释的跳跃”，Tour博士说，“我和其他科学家在未来会制造那些跳跃么？有可能”。
反方的请愿书已经发起。国家科教中心已经努力对待冲淡进化论教学的影响，已经发起一个有700名科学家签字的正视进化论请愿书，以纪念死于2002年的古生物学者Steve Jay Gould。
该请愿书断言进化论是“生物科学学至关重要的、完全支持的统一原理。”
那个学院的查普曼先生在说反方的请愿书时指出“我们决不声称要在数量上进行斗争”，他说。
发现官方说他们不问签字者的宗教信仰并且宗教信仰和这个不相关。发现的长者John G. West说它是“极好的伪善”去问签字者的宗教信仰“而对于宗教信仰是和达尔文不相关的”。
发现官方确实指出了两个科学家，学院里老年的哲学家数学家David Berlinski及纽约州宾厄姆顿大学的访问科学家Stanley N. Salthe他们签了字，但没有保守的宗教信仰。
Salthe博士把自己描述成无神论者，他说他签的时候对发现研究院是啥没有概念，他说，“我愤怒地签了”。
他说进化生物学家不公平压制任何竞争观点。“他们该戳，就该如此” Salthe博士说“这是我弄他们的方式”。
Salthe博士说他也没有发现智能设计论是个完整的理论。“以我的观点看，”他说“它是你们房子两边的瘟疫”。
Few Biologists but Many Evangelicals Sign Anti-Evolution Petition
By KENNETH CHANG
Published: February 21, 2006
In the recent skirmishes over evolution, advocates who have pushed to dilute its teaching have regularly pointed to a petition signed by 514 scientists and engineers.
The petition, they say, is proof that scientific doubt over evolution persists. But random interviews with 20 people who signed the petition and a review of the public statements of more than a dozen others suggest that many are evangelical Christians, whose doubts about evolution grew out of their religious beliefs. And even the petition's sponsor, the Discovery Institute in Seattle, says that only a quarter of the signers are biologists, whose field is most directly concerned with evolution. The other signers include 76 chemists, 75 engineers, 63 physicists and 24 professors of medicine.
The petition was started in 2001 by the institute, which champions intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution and supports a "teach the controversy" approach, like the one scuttled by the state Board of Education in Ohio last week.
Institute officials said that 41 people added their names to the petition after a federal judge ruled in December against the Dover, Pa., school district's attempt to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution.
"Early on, the critics said there was nobody who disbelieved Darwin's theory except for rubes in the woods," said Bruce Chapman, president of the institute. "How many does it take to be a noticeable minority ― 10, 50, 100, 500?"
Mr. Chapman said the petition showed "there is a minority of scientists who disagree with Darwin's theory, and it is not just a handful."
The petition makes no mention of intelligent design, the proposition that life is so complex that it is best explained as the design of an intelligent being. Rather, it states: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."
A Web site with the full list of those who signed the petition was made available yesterday by the institute at dissentfromdarwin.org. The signers all claim doctorates in science or engineering. The list includes a few nationally prominent scientists like James M. Tour, a professor of chemistry at Rice
University; Rosalind W. Picard, director of the affective computing research group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and Philip S. Skell, an emeritus professor of chemistry at Penn State who is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences.
It also includes many with more modest positions, like Thomas H. Marshall, director of public works in Delaware, Ohio, who has a doctorate in environmental ecology. The Discovery Institute says 128 signers hold degrees in the biological sciences and 26 in biochemistry. That leaves more than 350 nonbiologists, including Dr. Tour, Dr. Picard and Dr. Skell.
Of the 128 biologists who signed, few conduct research that would directly address the question of what shaped the history of life.
Of the signers who are evangelical Christians, most defend their doubts on scientific grounds but also say that evolution runs against their religious beliefs.
Several said that their doubts began when they increased their involvement with Christian churches.
Some said they read the Bible literally and doubt not only evolution but also findings of geology and cosmology that show the universe and the earth to be billions of years old.
Scott R. Fulton, a professor of mathematics and computer science at Clarkson University in Potsdam, N.Y., who signed the petition, said that the argument for intelligent design was "very interesting and promising."
He said he thought his religious belief was "not particularly relevant" in how he judged intelligent design. "It probably influences in the sense in that it makes me very interested in the questions," he said. "When I see scientific evidence that points to God, I find that encouraging."
Roger J. Lien, a professor of poultry science at Auburn, said he received a copy of the petition from Christian friends.
"I stuck my name on it," he said. "Basically, it states what I believe.
Dr. Lien said that he grew up in California in a family that was not deeply religious and that he accepted evolution through much of his scientific career. He said he became a Christian about a decade ago, six years after he joined the Auburn faculty.
"The world is broken, and we humans and our science can't fix it," Dr. Lien said. "I was brought to Jesus Christ and God and creationism and believing in the Bible."
He also said he thought that evolution was "inconsistent with what the Bible says."
Another signer is Dr. Gregory J. Brewer, a professor of cell biology at the Southern Illinois University medical school. Like other skeptics, he readily accepts what he calls "microevolution," the ability of species to adapt to changing conditions in their environment. But he holds to the opinion that science has not convincingly shown that one species can evolve into another.
"I think there's a lot of problems with evolutionary dogma," said Dr. Brewer, who also does not accept the scientific consensus that the universe is billions of years old. "Scientifically, I think there are other possibilities, one of which would be intelligent design. Based on faith, I do believe in the creation account."
Dr. Tour, who developed the "nano-car" ― a single molecule in the shape of a car, with four rolling wheels ― said he remained open-minded about evolution.
"I respect that work," said Dr. Tour, who describes himself as a Messianic Jew, one who also believes in Christ as the Messiah.
But he said his experience in chemistry and nanotechnology had showed him how hard it was to maneuver atoms and molecules. He found it hard to believe, he said, that nature was able to produce the machinery of cells through random processes. The explanations offered by evolution, he said, are incomplete.
"I can't make the jumps, the leaps they make in the explanations," Dr. Tour said. "Will I or other scientists likely be able to makes those jumps in the future? Maybe."
Opposing petitions have sprung up. The National Center for Science Education, which has battled efforts to dilute the teaching of evolution, has sponsored a pro-evolution petition signed by 700 scientists named Steve, in honor of Stephen Jay Gould, the Harvard paleontologist who died in 2002.
The petition affirms that evolution is "a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences."
Mr. Chapman of that institute said the opposing petitions were beside the point. "We never claimed we're in a fight for numbers," he said.
Discovery officials said that they did not ask the religious beliefs of the signers and that such beliefs were not relevant. John G. West, a senior fellow at Discovery, said it was "stunning hypocrisy" to ask signers about their religion "while treating the religious beliefs of the proponents of Darwin as irrelevant."
Discovery officials did point to two scientists, David Berlinski, a philosopher and mathematician and a senior fellow at the institute, and Stanley N. Salthe, a visiting scientist at Binghamton University, State University of New York, who signed but do not hold conservative religious beliefs.
Dr. Salthe, who describes himself as an atheist, said that when he signed the petition he had no idea what the Discovery Institute was. Rather, he said, "I signed it in irritation."
He said evolutionary biologists were unfairly suppressing any competing ideas. "They deserve to be prodded, as it were," Dr. Salthe said. "It was my way of thumbing my nose at them."
Dr. Salthe said he did not find intelligent design to be a compelling theory, either. "From my point of view," he said, "it's a plague on both your houses."