Wrestling with Nature From Omens to Science

Scientifi c Methods 335

George Gallup, “A Scientifi c Method for Determining Reader- Interest,” Journalism Quar-
terly, March 1930, 1–13.

67. “A Hard Look at ‘Flying Saucers,’” U.S. News & World Report, April 11, 1966, 15.


68. J. Allen Hynek, The UFO Experience: A Scientifi c Inquiry (Chicago: Henry Regnery,
    1972), 237; “A Hard Look at ‘Flying Saucers,’” 15; Patrick Huyghe, “Scientists Who
    Have Seen UFOs,” Science Digest, November 1981, 119.


69. Robert Cowan, “Explanations of the First Kind,” Technology Review, March–
    April 1979, 83.


70. On falsifi cation, see Malachi Haim Hacohen, Karl Popper: The Formative Years,
    1902–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).


71. See for instance, Stephenie G. Edgerton, “Is There a Scientifi c Method?” His-
    tory of Education Quarterly, Winter 1969, 492–95; A. Cornelius Benjamin, “Is There a
    Scientifi c Method?” Journal of Higher of Education (May 1956): 233–38; Joseph Turner,
    “Is There a Scientifi c Method?” Science, September 6, 1957, 431.


72. Helen P. Libel, “History and the Limitations of Scientifi c Method,” University of
    Toronto Quarterly, October 1964, 15–16.


73. Walter A. Thurber and Alfred T. Collette, Teaching Science in Today’s Secondary
    Schools (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1964), 7.


74. John L. Rudolph, Scientists in the Classroom (New York: Palgrave, 2002).


75. Edgerton, “Is There a Scientifi c Method?” 493.


76. James Willwerth, “The Man from Outer Space,” Time, April 25, 1994, 75.


77. Philip M Buffey, “UFO Study: Condon Group Finds No Evidence of Visits from
    Outer Space,” Science, January 17, 1969, 262.


78. “AGU: President Confuses Science and Belief, Puts Schoolchildren at Risk,”
    Skeptical Inquirer, November–December 2005, 45.


79. Michael J. Behe, “The God of Science: The Case for Intelligent Design,” Weekly
    Standard, June 7, 1999, 35; William Dembski, Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Sci-
    ence & Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 258.


80. Robert George Sprackland, “A Scientist Tells Why ‘Intelligent Design’ Is NOT
    Science,” Educational Digest, January, 2006, 30.


81. Keith B. Miller, “The Controversy over the Kansas Science Standards,” http: //
    www .wheaton .edu / ACG / essays / miller1 .html.


82. William Dembski, The Design Revolution (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press,
    2004), 312; Dembski, Intelligent Design, 108.


83. By one estimate, between 10 and 17 percent of U.S. adults qualifi ed as scientifi -
    cally literate during the 1980s and 1990s. See Jon D. Miller, “Public Understanding
    of, and Attitudes toward, Scientifi c Research: What We Know and What We Need to
    Know,” Public Understanding of Science 13 (2004): 288.


84. Broman, “The Habermasian Public Sphere,” 143; Christopher Toumey, Conjur-
    ing Science (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1996), 153.


85. Jim Holt, “Madness About a Method,” New York Times Magazine, December 11,
    2005, 25.


86. Richard Dawkins, The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2003 (Boston,
    2004), xvii (original emphasis).