Count On Steves to Defend Darwin
The National Center for Science Education initiated Project Steve in 2003 to count scientists named Steve (or Stephanie) who accept evolution, in response to lists of anti-evolution PhDs. The long-running effort, also a tribute to Stephen Jay Gould, crowned its thousandth Steve, a proxy for approximately 100,000 scientists, at last week's AAAS meeting. Steve Mirsky reports
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]
Creationists often publish lists of a few dozen scientists who doubt Darwin. So in 2003 the National Center for Science Education put together a list of 200 scientists who accept evolution.
“Except that all of ours were named Steve.” That was the NCSE’s Eugenie Scott at last week’s AAAS meeting. “And now we have one thousand scientists named Steve. Project Steve has a serious message. Approximately one percent of Americans are named Steve or Stephanie, so do the math. Our one thousand Steves represents a hundred thousand scientists accepting evolution, as opposed to the rather paltry number dissing Darwin. It’s important because in states where we have major problems with anti-evolution going on, the number of scientists doubting evolution has been proclaimed to the public. I just want the press to keep asking, ‘How many Steves do you have?’”
And the thousandth Steve is: “The distinguished botanist at the University of Tulane and head of the Tulane Herbarium, Steve Darwin.”
—Steve Mirsky
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:
RSS | iTunes
It’s Time to Stand Up for Science
If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.
