Judge rebukes witness at creation trial

Press, 16 December 1981, Page 9

Judge rebukes witness at creation trial

NZPA-Reuter Little Rock, Arkansas

The judge in the Arkansas Monkey Trial sharply reprimanded a key defence witness yesterday for his “baseless” evidence in support of the state’s law forcing public schools to teach creationism.

judge William Overton, virtually silent until this sixth day of the landmark trial, interrupted -angrily after two hours of evidence by a South Carolina chemistry teacher, William Morrow. Dr Morrow, supporting the law providing for “equal weight” of teaching of evolution and creationism, argued that the American scientific community had ganged up to suppress creation theories. “Wait, wait, wait,” the judge said. “You have a problem, doctor. I have been sitting here since 10.30 and you have expressed a series of opinions and I have not heard a single fact cited for one of them.

“You have not given us a basis for one of them.” Dr Morrow had admitted under cross-examination by the American Civil Liberties Union that he could not give one instance of what he called a nationwide campaign by science journals to suppress “creation science.” The Arkansas law would force schools teaching evolution also to teach a theory of recent supernatural creation. The A.C.L.U.i says this is religion, which is forbidden in public-school teaching. Judge Overton, who is hearing the case alone, allowed Dr Morrow’s evidence, but made his feelings conspicuous by staring at the

ceiling, glaring at the witness and shaking his head, and covering his eyes with his hands. Dr Morrow was the third witness for the state’s case in defence of the law.

Dr Morrow, calling himself an evolutionist and agnostic, defended creationism as scientific and then admitted that, in pre-trial evidence last month, he had denied any scientific basis to any tenet of the creed.

He explained this conversion by saying that since arriving in Little Rock four days ago he had learned more about creationism.

The second of eight witnesses who will defend the law, Larry Parker, a curriculum supervisor at Georgia State University, said it was important that schools should teach evolution and creationism.

He admitted, however, that though part of his job was to evaluate courses to be taught, he had never read a book on evolution and had not the slightest idea whether there was any scientific basis to “creation science.”

Dr Parker, who acknowledged that he had been a creationist “since before high school,” also said he would be willing to teach, the “flatearth theory” if he felt this would be a way of broadening students’ learning. The Arkansas AttorneyGeneral (Mr Steve Clark), asked by reporters to discuss the quality of the defence’s case, has alleged that “peer pressure”, in the scientific community has prevented any prominent scientist from appearing on his side.