Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul (Paperback)

by Edward Humes (Author)
Key Phrases: breathtaking inanity, intelligent design policy, monkey girl, Discovery Institute, Supreme Court, Bill Buckingham (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From The Washington Post
Reviewed by Christine Rosen

What's in a name? For supporters of the theory of "intelligent design" (ID), a great deal. They argue that the complexity of our universe is best understood as the result of an intelligent cause rather than the undirected process of natural selection described by Charles Darwin, and they want to see this taught in public school science classes. ID is not religious, they argue; it is simply scientific. But critics of ID argue that it is merely a more sophisticated way of promoting "creation science," which rejects evolutionary theory in favor of a literal reading of the book of Genesis and therefore promotes the teaching of religion in public schools.

In 2004, when the Dover, Penn., school board voted to require biology classes to use a supplemental textbook that promoted the theory of intelligent design rather than evolution, the conflict that erupted was about far more than semantics. As Edward Humes describes in this lively and thoughtful book, Dover -- like Dayton, Tenn., during the 1925 Scopes "Monkey Trial" -- became a proving ground for clashing beliefs about the origins of life and constitutional questions about the separation of church and state.

"The scientific community sees the creationist critics of evolution as yahoos, religious zealots, and scientifically suspect charlatans," writes Humes. "The creationists see the evolutionists as immoral and dishonest purveyors of a pseudoreligion called Darwinism that makes God superfluous." Each side is guilty of misrepresenting the other. In Dover, the people on each side believed those on the other were attempting to indoctrinate their children. And everyone soon realized that this local controversy had national implications.

Humes takes the title of his book, Monkey Girl, from the taunt leveled at a child whose mother objected to the new policy. Some parents, including teachers in the school district, viewed intelligent design as a stealth form of creation science. Although many of these parents were Christians (two even taught Sunday school), they felt that teaching ID in a public school classroom improperly injected religion into education. They brought their case, Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District, with the aid of the ACLU, the National Center for Science Education and lawyers from the Philadelphia firm Pepper Hamilton.

Defending the Dover school board was a Michigan-based public interest law firm, the Thomas More Law Center, and, initially, the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, a nonprofit research institute that has tried to make ID a palatable alternative to evolutionary theory. As Humes describes it, the Discovery Institute's "seductively reasonable" approach to evolution is "teach the controversy," implying that there is a scientific controversy about evolution, when in fact the controversy is a cultural one. Yet the strategy has proven effective for increasing public awareness about ID, and it has put supporters of evolutionary theory on the defensive.

Although he provides the necessary backstory to the Dover case, the most gripping portions of the book are Humes's descriptions of the trial itself, which began in the fall of 2005. "Kitzmiller became at root everything the original Scopes trial had started out to be but was not," Humes writes. "Back then, the leading scientists had been ready to testify, only to be ruled irrelevant by the creationist judge who presided in Dayton." In Harrisburg, however, scientific experts from both sides argued for 40 days in testimony that often included abstruse discussions of the properties of bacterial flagella.

According to Humes, proponents of intelligent design quickly realized that this would not be their triumphant hour. The experts called by the plaintiffs repeatedly and relentlessly challenged the claims of ID's supporters. The defense also succumbed to internal squabbling.

Although his own sympathies clearly are with the defenders of evolutionary theory, Humes makes a strenuous effort to be fair-minded. He offers a sympathetic portrait of Michael Behe, the Lehigh University biochemist well known for his work on ID and the defense's star expert witness. School board member Bill Buckingham, the driving force behind the ID policy, could easily have come across as an ignorant fundamentalist bully. In Humes's hands, he is a more complex and pitiable figure -- a stubborn, intolerant man who was also in chronic pain and struggling to overcome an addiction to OxyContin but who felt that what he was doing was good for the schoolchildren of Dover.

Judge John E. Jones III, a Republican, emerges as the hero in Humes's tale. In his eloquent ruling for the plaintiffs, which should be read by every student of law, he noted, "This case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy." Even before Jones issued his ruling, the citizens of Dover reached their own verdict: In the next school board election, "every one of the eight incumbents who favored intelligent design was ousted," Humes writes.

Given his talent for narrative and eye for detail, one wishes Humes had delved deeper into the culture that nurtures creationist beliefs. His story would have benefited from a more nuanced examination of Christian fundamentalism (and the ways in which it differs from evangelical Protestantism). For, as Humes himself notes, you need not be a fundamentalist to have sympathy for the scriptural story of creation. "Nearly half the citizenry accepts the idea that God created man in his present form, just as the Bible holds," he writes. "Only a third believes that there is valid scientific evidence to support the theory of evolution."

Given this fact, it is remarkable that we don't see more skirmishes such as the one that erupted in Dover. The Kitzmiller case was not quite the "battle for America's soul" that Humes suggests in his subtitle, but it was an important episode in the country's ongoing struggle to reconcile faith, science and culture. Humes's book is a compelling account of that struggle, and likely not the last salvo in the battle between evolution and intelligent design.

Copyright 2007, The Washington Post. All Rights Reserved. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

From Bookmarks Magazine
The Pulitzer Prize?winning Edward Humes (Mississippi Mud, School of Dreams, Over Here) knows how to successfully tackle society's big issues and present them to the general reader. Monkey Girl is no exception. Humes writes clearly, makes complex scientific ideas accessible, and uses a novelistic approach to heighten the legal conflict and courtroom drama. Critics diverged only on a few points. While most thought Humes's account evenhanded (for example, his sympathetic portrait of the defense's star witness, Michael Behe), the Wall Street Journal called Humes "disappointingly self-righteous" in his criticism of intelligent design. And while most applauded his exhaustive reporting, a few cited a simplified narrative. Monkey Girl still stands as the best book for staying current on the arguments for and against the teaching of evolution in our public schools.

Copyright © 2004 Phillips & Nelson Media, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 400 pages
• Publisher: Harper Perennial (February 19, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0060885491
• ISBN-13: 978-0060885496
• Product Dimensions: 7.9 x 5.2 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars See all reviews (55 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #82,013 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

99 of 105 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars I couldn't put it down, February 15, 2007

By	William C. Garthright (Lincoln, NE United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul (Hardcover)

It appears that the "culture wars" are playing out even in these reviews, and it doesn't seem likely that we'll get any neutral observations. I wonder if people who gave it poor reviews even read it. To my mind, "Monkey Girl" is about as fair to both sides as you can get,... but the trial was a slam-dunk, after all. If you read the book without any pre-conceived ideas, I think you'll be amazed at how sympathetic - and how understandable - the author really is.

More importantly, perhaps, the writing is superb. I have rarely read a non-fiction book that kept my attention as well as this one. Honestly, I could not put it down. It covers not just the famous Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, but the situation leading up to the trial, including background on the entire evolution-creationism war. I learned a great deal from the book, while being even more greatly entertained by it.

If you're interested at all in our public schools, I strongly recommend this book. If you're on a school board, you NEED to read this book. Frankly, I think that nearly everyone should read it, simply because it explains the whole controversy so well - and explains the science, the history, and the politics behind it - while being such a darn good read. It WILL keep your attention. Highly recommended!

66 of 70 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Lies, Damn Lies and Creationism, March 23, 2007

By	Omer Belsky (Haifa, Israel) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

This review is from: Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul (Hardcover)

Few areas of American public life are as fascinating at the continuing struggle between evolutionists and creationists. It's a struggle that involves Science and Religion, Theology and Philosophy, Politics always, and, more often then not, the Law.

Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District was the latest in a long series of trials about the teaching of evolution in American Public school. The first one was the famous "Scopes Monkey Trial", in which a replacement science teacher was prosecuted for teaching evolution against state law. The teacher, John Scopes, lost, and anti-evolution laws remained on the books in many US states until the Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional. Ever since, the shoe was on the other foot - Kitzmiller, dubbed scopes II (or III, or IV, or V, etc), went the other way around - it featured a group of parents, upset about a legislative attempt to sneak the newest repackaging of creationism - a glossed up version marketed under the moniker of "Intelligent Design" - into biology class.

Journalist Edward Humes wrote a fascinating account of the Dover Trial, setting it in context of the historical creation/evolution divide, recent development, and the general approached of the religious right and the Bush administration - memorably described as a "War on" - science.

Early in the century, a group of newly elected members of the Dover school board decided that the then current biology curriculum was unsuitable. The reason? It was "laced with Darwinism". Those board members knew little about science, evolution, or "Intelligent Design", and cared less. What they cared about was that "[2000 years ago] a man died on a cross. Can't someone stand up for him"? Standing up for him meant bringing creationist viewpoints to "balance" evolution. It meant bullying Board members who disagreed by branding them atheists. Finally, it meant lying under oath to hide the religious motives behind what they have done.

I have followed the developments of the trial as it took place, but the book exposed the board members as more dishonest, incompetent and ridiculous then I could have imagined. Judge Jones's reference to "breathtaking inanity" is apt. Witness the testimony of Board member Heather Geesey under cross examination (abridged from pp. 318-319):

Q: "You supported the change?"
A: "Yes"
Q: "And the policy talks about gaps and problems with evolution?"
A: "Yes"
Q: "You don't know what those gaps and problems are, do you?
A: "No"
Q: "Is it fair to say you didn't know much about Intelligent Design in October 2004? [When the Creationist policy was adopted]?"
A: "Yes".
Q: "And you didn't know much about the book 'of Panda and People' [The creationist test book supported by the board and the ID movement]?
A: "No"
Q: "You never read the book?"
A: "No"
Q: "So you didn't really think much about Intelligent Design?"
A: "No"

This was entirely typical. The leader of the Board Creationists, Bill Buckingham could not differentiate between the origin of life and the origin of species (p. 15), nor could he explain what either evolution or intelligent design were in any terms approaching coherence (p. 219). Clearly, the Board didn't promote the Intelligent Design policy in order to improve scientific education, as they had claimed. They wouldn't know science if it hit them in the face. Their motivation was entirely religious.

The other setback for Intelligent Design, the one even its more sophisticated advocated (such as biochemist Michael Behe) could not disguise, was that it simply is not science. In order to make Intelligent Design into a science, Behe had to redefine science in such a way as to include Astrology (p. 301). The plaintiff's attorney, Eric Rothschild, effectively challenged all of Behe's assertions, disclosing that his best selling ID book, "Darwin's Black Box", received scantly any peer review, that Intelligent Design could not reveal the mechanism through which design was supposed to work (p. 303), and that the only scientific paper published by Intelligent Design was entirely irrelevant, making a calculation too complex by a factor vastly exceeding 10 billion (p. 305).

The end result is well known, Conservative Republican Judge John E. Jones, appointed by George W. Bush, ruled that the board had a religious purpose in enacting its pro- Intelligent Design policy, and that Intelligent Design was not science. I find it encouraging that the Judge in the case was a Republican and a Bush appointee. In a time when we are seeing extremists taking over the Republican Party, it's good to know that a there is still a moderate, rationalist wing to it. I hope that with the failure of the "Faith Based Approach" to foreign Policy, crisis management, the economy, science, and civil rights, the US Republican party would return to its roots as a moderate, non radical party.

Perhaps most depressing in Hume's account is the revelation of how little evolution is actually taught in America's schools. As Hume described it, even before the change, evolution was briefly mentioned, minor issues about it were explained, and in less then 90 minutes, the heresy was forgotten. Indeed, the Science teacher's most popular biology book (nicknamed "The Dragonfly book" for the picture on its cover), was popular precisely because it virtually ignored the "E" word, and the latest edition, the one purchased by the school, and supposedly still used as I write these lines, marginalized the subject even more then the previous edition. In a sense, the creationists should never have worried about the teaching of evolution - they had won that battle before it ever started.

43 of 45 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Defining the Controversy, March 22, 2007

By	Laura Grey "lolaphilologist" (Ann Arbor, MI) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: Monkey Girl: Evolution, Education, Religion, and the Battle for America's Soul (Hardcover)

"In the time of Galileo it was argued that the texts, 'And the sun stood still ... and hasted not to go down about a whole day' (Joshua x. 13) and 'He laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not move at any time' (Psalm cv. 5) were an adequate refutation of the Copernican theory."
Alan Turing, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind 59 (1950), 443.

Pulitzer Prize winning Ed Humes delivers this comprehensive review of 2005's Dover, Pennsylvania controversial trial, Kitzmiller. vs. Dover Area School District.

You may think you know this controversy, but you'll never get a more thorough and up-to-date treatment of the Dover trial than this. You may be as surprised at some of the newest developments as I was. This is one of the latest episodes of the seemingly never-ending struggle for the hearts and minds of public school students between those who feel that Science describes nature pretty well and those who believe that anything other than a strict literal interpretation of the Bible deserves a trip to hell and excommunication from polite society. It is my personal opinion that those who ridicule the scientific method and mock Darwin's work while refusing to read it, do not deserve to benefit from the fruits of science (such as a computer and the internet), much less influence science curriculum in public schools. Ed Humes didn't go as far as I just did in his book, but you'd think he did from all the whining I've read about it in forums dedicated to the subject.

It's enough to make you miss the Cold War. I still remember how Math and Science were emphasized if only to remind us that we needed to compete with the Soviets. I'm thinking it kept some of this sort of nonsense out of Science Ed. I was in AP Biology in 1988, in Midland, Texas, where fundamentalists feel right at home. In fact, many kids and teachers openly carried Bibles with them at all times, and didn't hesitate to talk about it. At the time, our Biology teacher gave us the little speech prepared to soothe those who feel that their religious beliefs clash with the teachings of Biology in public schools. He told us that the textbook had nothing to do with the origins of life, nor the descent of mankind and other primates from a common ancestor. He also told us something that I still believe to this day. He said that the question of "How" belongs to Science, and that the question of "Why" belongs to Religion. He also said that while he was not going to talk to us about religion at all (not his job as a Biology teacher) he himself had very strong religious beliefs and did not find them to be in conflict with what he taught. He told us that if any of us found any of our beliefs in conflict with the content of the class we could feel free to discuss it with our parents, and with him after class. Until reading this book, I assumed that all but the most extreme religious fundamentalists were fine with this truce-for many years public school biology books limited discussion to a small description of evolution as "changes over time" in high school biology. I was wrong.

While the book mostly focuses on the Dover trial, Humes also takes us to the nearly parallel trial in Kansas (which produced the sharp parody of the Flying Spaghetti Monster), the controversy in the Grand Canyon Giftshop (where Creationists have had some success in censoring information about the geological age of the national monument), and the pseudo-scientific think-tank which excludes any science in conflict with Christian Scripture. I couldn't be certain, but they probably conveniently ignore the scripture at the top of the page regarding the sun going around a stationary earth.

The Dover Trial is full of drama and bad debate, A Scopes Monkey Trial for the 21st century, or Inherit the Wind, Redux. Humes shows in the Dover case how Creationism in public schools, having been defeated in courts during the late 20th century under the Separation of Church and State clause of the First Amendment, evolved (pun intended) into the virtually identical Intelligent Design movement, to Dover, Pennsylvania among other places. Some of the most shocking moments of the trial feature the ironic displays of dishonesty which ultimately brought down the school board members who were trying to bring religion into the local biology classrooms, and had designs on bringing it into the history and government classes as well.

This very book elicits criticism from those whose definition of "Fair and Balanced" have been warped to Orwellian proportions by Fox News and today's most hyperbolic propagandists. Humes compassionately portrays how the plaintiffs' religious beliefs in this case, were attacked and their children mocked at school out of ignorance. The Dover case pitted one kind of Christians against another. Those who favored the separation of Church and State were attacked as "not Christian enough", in a great example of how the separation of these two functions protects freedom of religion. Another surprising turn of events showed how the presiding judge, a Bush-supporting Republican was branded as a liberal judicial activist for defending the constitution.

While it is clear which side Humes' sympathies lie, the reader is necessarily confronted with the heart of the controversy: regarding extreme religious views which by definition do not tolerate any opposing views, what are the limits of tolerance in society? How can a democracy defend pluralism from those whose religious beliefs clash so vehemently with the definition of reality itself by the rest of the world, both secular and religious? The Framers of the Constitution were historically not far away from centuries of religious wars in Europe which constantly threw governments into turmoil. They saw the value of the separation of church and state to both church and state. Back in those days religious persecution meant death or incarceration because of one's beliefs, not what passes for persecution these days in the minds of some.

One gets the strong impression that this latest version of the old Darwin-vs.-God controversy is the product of the removal of Critical Thinking skills from the mainstream public school curriculum, and the lack of a Cold War Era push towards developments in Math & Science, supported by all but the most outspoken of Bible literalists, who constantly attempt to couch the debate as "God vs. Darwin", when in fact, most religions don't require people to choose between the two. In my opinion, this is a clear case of the old adage, "Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it". Young-Earth Creationists might benefit from not ignoring the history of the Catholic Church's censorship of Copernicus and Gallileo hundreds of years ago, and ask themselves why the Pope doesn't have a big problem with Darwin's theories today.