Grand Canyon National Park not permitted to give its geologic age (PEER)

Begin forwarded message:

From: Paul Saffo <[email protected]>
Date: December 30, 2006 12:31:46 PM EST
To: Dave Farber <[email protected]>
Subject: Grand Canyon National Park not permitted to give its=20=20
geologic age (PEER)

oh my...
-p

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility News Release
(www.peer.org)

For Immediate Release: December 28, 2006
Contact: Carol Goldberg (202) 265-7337

HOW OLD IS THE GRAND CANYON? PARK SERVICE WON=92T SAY =97 Orders to Cater to
Creationists Makes National Park Agnostic on Geology

Washington, DC =97 Grand Canyon National Park is not permitted to give an
official estimate of the geologic age of its principal feature, due to
pressure from Bush administration appointees. Despite promising a prompt
review of its approval for a book claiming the Grand Canyon was=20=20
created by
Noah's flood rather than by geologic forces, more than three years=20=20
later no
review has ever been done and the book remains on sale at the park,
according to documents released today by Public Employees for=20=20
Environmental
Responsibility (PEER).

=93In order to avoid offending religious fundamentalists, our National=20=
=20
Park
Service is under orders to suspend its belief in geology,=94 stated PEER
Executive Director Jeff Ruch. =93It is disconcerting that the official
position of a national park as to the geologic age of the Grand=20=20
Canyon is
=91no comment.=92=94

In a letter released today, PEER urged the new Director of the=20=20
National Park
Service (NPS), Mary Bomar, to end the stalling tactics, remove the=20=20
book from
sale at the park and allow park interpretive rangers to honestly answer
questions from the public about the geologic age of the Grand Canyon.=20=20
PEER
is also asking Director Bomar to approve a pamphlet, suppressed since=20=20
2002
by Bush appointees, providing guidance for rangers and other=20=20
interpretive
staff in making distinctions between science and religion when=20=20
speaking to
park visitors about geologic issues.

In August 2003, Park Superintendent Joe Alston attempted to block the=20=20
sale
at park bookstores of Grand Canyon: A Different View by Tom Vail, a book
claiming the Canyon developed on a biblical rather than an=20=20
evolutionary time
scale. NPS Headquarters, however, intervened and overruled Alston. To=20=20
quiet
the resulting furor, NPS Chief of Communications David Barna told=20=20
reporters
and members of Congress that there would be a high-level policy=20=20
review of
the issue.

According to a recent NPS response to a Freedom of Information Act=20=20
request
filed by PEER, no such review was ever requested, let alone conducted or
completed.

Park officials have defended the decision to approve the sale of Grand
Canyon: A Different View, claiming that park bookstores are like=20=20
libraries,
where the broadest range of views are displayed. In fact, however,=20=20
both law
and park policies make it clear that the park bookstores are more like
schoolrooms rather than libraries. As such, materials are only to=20=20
reflect
the highest quality science and are supposed to closely support approved
interpretive themes. Moreover, unlike a library the approval process=20=20
is very
selective. Records released to PEER show that during 2003, Grand Canyon
officials rejected 22 books and other products for bookstore=20=20
placement while
approving only one new sale item =97 the creationist book.

Ironically, in 2005, two years after the Grand Canyon creationist
controversy erupted, NPS approved a new directive on =93Interpretation and
Education (Director=92s Order #6) which reinforces the posture that=20=20
materials
on the =93history of the Earth must be based on the best scientific=20=20
evidence
available, as found in scholarly sources that have stood the test of
scientific peer review and criticism [and] Interpretive and educational
programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious beliefs=20=20
explaining
natural processes.=94

=93As one park geologist said, this is equivalent of Yellowstone=20=20
National Park
selling a book entitled Geysers of Old Faithful: Nostrils of Satan,=94=20=
=20
Ruch
added, pointing to the fact that previous NPS leadership ignored strong
protests from both its own scientists and leading geological societies
against the agency approval of the creationist book. =93We sincerely=20=20
hope that
the new Director of the Park Service now has the autonomy to do her=20=20
job.=94

###

Read the PEER letter to NPS Director Bomar

View the NPS admission that no policy review on the creationist book has
occurred

See the 2005 NPS Director=92s Order #6 on Interpretation

8.4.2 Historical and Scientific Research. Superintendents, historians,
scientists, and interpretive staff are responsible for ensuring that=20=20
park
interpretive and educational programs and media are accurate and reflect
current scholarship=85Questions often arise round the presentation of
geological, biological, and evolutionary processes. The interpretive and
educational treatment used to explain the natural processes and=20=20
history of
the Earth must be based on the best scientific evidence available, as=20=20
found
in scholarly sources that have stood the test of scientific peer=20=20
review and
criticism. The facts, theories, and interpretations to be used will=20=20
reflect
the thinking of the scientific community in such fields as biology,=20=20
geology,
physics, astronomy, chemistry, and paleontology. Interpretive and
educational programs must refrain from appearing to endorse religious
beliefs explaining natural processes. Programs, however, may=20=20
acknowledge or
explain other explanations of natural processes and events. (Emphasis=20=20
added)

Trace how the creationist book controversy started and grew

Look at tax dollars used to support the Bush administration program of
=93Faith-Based Parks=94

http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=3D801