Kenneth Miller, a professor of biology at Brown University and a prominent science author, gave a lecture titled “The Evolution Wars: Why Do They Matter? Why Do They Continue?” to a crowded room in UMass’ Campus Center on Thursday. Although Miller’s lecture touched on numerous aspects of the evolution debate, his central message was that evolution and faith can coexist harmoniously and that the two are not mutually exclusive. He also said that to continue to take sides would only hamper science education in the United States.

“Science is compatible with faith, especially a kind of faith that accepts scientific reason as a divine gift,” said Miller, author of “Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search For Common Ground Between God and Evolution.”

“I think that the best religious traditions do exactly that,” he said.

Miller used the 19th century Austrian scientist Gregor Mendel as an example of why he feels the two are not irreconcilable. Mendel was devoutly religious, but was also a brilliant scientist and is now considered a father of modern genetics, Miller said.

Furthermore, Miller thinks the intricacies and perfection of evolution are more flattering to a higher power than intentional design.

“I think it’s remarkable to think that you and I are bound into the fabric of life that pervades everywhere on this incredibly beautiful planet on which we happen to live,” he said.

Using former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum as an example, Miller said he feels those who do not believe in evolution sometimes believe the theory implies humans are “mistakes of nature” and devoid of moral compass. Miller thinks these attitudes are unfounded.

“What I’ve tried very hard to do is to take those concerns that people have about the theory of evolution as being degrading or demeaning or dehumanizing and try to say this isn’t true,” he said. “Evolutionary processes are creative…they’re driven by natural selection, which is as nonrandom a force as you can get.”

Miller does not believe intelligent design is a credible scientific theory. Rather, he holds that it is nothing more than a rather silly religiously-tinged doctrine. During the lecture, he discussed what he believed to be “weapons” of the intelligent design movement: “intentional distortion” of facts used to support the theory of evolution and “fear of the implications of evolution for people of faith.” Maneuvers like these, Miller believes, are creating a movement against science.

“I really am concerned about an anti-science tide in the United States,” he said. “There are certain people, certain political groups, who seem to feel that science is inherently left-wing. This is why the evolution wars matter – it’s Exhibit A in the portfolio of the anti-science movement in the United States.”

Because he feels science and politics are becoming increasingly intertwined, Miller said he finds himself talking about politics with his friends from the scientific community more than ever before.

“We feel that the political process has become, in some respects, so anti-scientific that we literally have to defend ourselves,” he said.

Miller said he does not believe mounting support for the intelligent design theory – which holds that the world could only have been created by an intelligent being – accounts exclusively for what he sees as America’s slippage in science education or for what he identifies as a rising anti-science sentiment in the country. He also pointed a finger at the declining quality of education.

“You don’t have to look very far to discover that American students are behind in math and science,” said Miller. “We’re really, really not doing a very good job of teaching or learning science, and it would be naïve to suspect that this resistance to science has nothing to do with poor science education in this country.”

This lack of focus on science education, according to Miller, comes in part from the scientific community’s dry reputation and lack of representation in mainstream culture. Miller believes the scientific community needs to take more vocal political action and improve its communication with the rest of society by making science more digestible for the average citizen.

“There almost is a culture within the scientific community that looks down on people who are good at popularizing science,” he said during a short question-and-answer session after the lecture.

During his lecture, Miller outlined several 20th century court cases surrounding evolution in learning environments. The rulings have given him hope for the future. Most of the court cases – including Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, in which Miller was a participant – have ruled in favor of science.

“Don’t lose faith in democracy,” he said. “The American people, given a choice, are going to pick science every time.”

In addition to writing “Finding Darwin’s God,” Miller is perhaps best known for his appearances on the satiric pundit show The Colbert Report and the high school science textbook he co-authored with Joe Levin, “Biology.”

The lecture was presented and organized by UMass’ Interdisciplinary Seminar in the Humanities and Fine Arts (ISHA).

Michael Roberts can be reached at [email protected].