The most toxic thing about this whole discussion is the impression that most of the public has, that there's a line in the sand, and you have to be on one side or the other.

Scholars may contribute their knowledge or insight to public debate on important issues. They may contribute it in a form that is understandable to a policymaker, or even to the public, consistently with their duty of rigorous intellectual honesty. Scholars should not feel constrained to publish only turgid prose in obscure journals. They should not leave the public debate to those who feel no scruples whatever to conform their claims to the evidence.

We can predict this fight happening elsewhere.

When they say 'teach the controversy' — their ringing phrase — they want us to pretend to students that scientists are arguing whether evolution took place. This argument is not taking place.

Evolution makes biology make sense. And if you don't teach your students the evolutionary core of biology, you're making it harder for them.

It is already clear that the new slogan for the ID movement is going to be 'Teach the Controversy!' -- even though there is no scientific controversy over the validity of evolution in biology.