Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
1. Introduction: Statement on Evolution
As the leading museum of biodiversity in Singapore, The Lee Kong Chian Museum is
an important institution that bridges public understanding with evolutionary biology.
According to the museum’s vision statement, which outlines 3 areas of research,
education and outreach, its primary mission is to further understandings of biodiversity
(Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum, 2016). Indispensable to this appreciation of
biodiversity is the larger process of evolution. Given their essential relationship, we posit
that tying together the museum’s statement on evolution with its vision delivers a
stronger and more effective message on the value of evolution (the statement) in
understanding biodiversity (the mission). In reference to the various strategies adopted
by other museums of natural history all over the world, this approach is not new and has
been employed by the established Carnegie Museum of Natural History (Carnegie
Museum of Natural History, 2016) Our display of the museum’s stand will thus compose
of two complementary components, rather than a standalone statement, first the mission
of furthering appreciation of biodiversity and second the statement affirming the value
of evolution in line with this vision. As part of the visual display, we include the simple
but powerfully representative image of the tree of life to tie together the statement on
evolution.
The statement of evolution will be as follows:
The Value of Evolution in Appreciating the Diversity of Life on Earth
Our Mission: The Lee Kong Chian Museum of Natural History aims to be the leading
institution of research, education and outreach on biodiversity in Southeast Asia.
Our Statement on Evolution: Evolution is the central concept in explaining the
diversity of life on Earth. All living things on Earth today have emerged from a long and
ongoing process of changes. Through a common ancestry, every species is related to
each other in the web of life. This is evident in the fossil records, and has become a wellestablished and universally supported theory by scientists all over the world. As a
leading institution of biodiversity research, the Lee Kong Chian Museum of Natural
History has the responsibility to share with the public the latest research on the process
of evolution. We seek purely to advance scientific understanding and encourage
visitors to have their own spiritual beliefs. We invite our visitors to join us in exploring
the concepts of the theory of evolution, observing the evidence which supports it, and
discovering the ever unfolding mysteries and their solutions which bring us further in
appreciating the wonders of life on Earth.
1
Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
We propose to display the statement at the centre of the museum exhibition,
where it will be strategically accompanied by the star-attraction of the museum—the
dinosaur fossils. The reason behind the placement is that the exhibits of the museum on
the ground floor, arranged in a circular manner, largely centres on evolution and the tree
of life—which is the overarching narrative told by our museum statement. At any
moment whether to the beginning or the end, visitors can always return to view this
statement and how it relates to everything they see in the museum.
Our rationale behind the content of the statement is to aim to establish the basis
of the theory of evolution, its overwhelming support in the scientific community, its
intellectual insight and explanatory power, and how it ties in with the story of life and
biodiversity presented in the specimens and exhibits of the museum. These are pursued
in line with the position statement by the National Teachers Association on the
professional teaching of Evolution in schools (National Teachers Association, 2016),
which reiterate the principle of demonstrating the importance of evolution as a unifying
concept while eschewing opinion on religious interpretations and personal beliefs. We
believe that a clear message on the broad ideas, evidence and credibility, and value and
purpose of the museum are key components of our statement for the understanding of
the museum visitors. It is not our objective as a scientific institution to engage with debate
beyond the scientific realm, such as religious beliefs on the original creation, purpose and
spiritual meaning of life and the world itself. As understanding is the first step to
accepting Evolution, the key is thus to engage in scientific education in the most easily
comprehensible, relatable and non-confrontational language and manner.
In this introductory section, we have outlined our proposal of the museum’s
stance on evolution. In the next section, we seek to address the possible reactions to our
museum’s stance on evolution and offer general guiding principles of engagement. We
then delve into specific scenarios of contention and recommend responses for gallery
guides. Finally, we conclude by summing up our recommendations.
2
Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
2. Guiding Principles of Engagement
Our statement on evolution may be received in a variety of ways. Whether outright
rejection, doubt, or partial acceptance, the theory of Evolution draws reactions from
diverse axes of contention, even before and regardless of viewing the museum exhibits
themselves. It is important to recognise that there are different rationales for rejecting
Evolution, even among creationists (Alters & Alters, 2001). There are also different
extents to which evolutionary teaching is rejected. Rejection of evolution can arise due to
different reasons: inadequate or incorrect factual knowledge, inadequate understanding
of the nature of science, religion, psychological obstacles or socio-political influences
(Allmon, 2011).
Firstly, there exist a rejection to evolution and science itself. Such visitors may
already arrive with pre-existing opinion against evolution, such as creationism (The
Institute for Creation Research, 2016). They may also reject evolution as they believe it
to be contrary to religious teachings on the divine purpose and origin of life. Secondly,
there are those sceptical of evolution based on scientific critique of insufficient evidence
or missing fossils. Such visitors do not fundamentally reject the logic and methodology of
science, and remain receptive reconsideration should evidence be made available.
Thirdly, there may be visitors who accept the explanation of evolution for the diversity of
life, all except for humans. The point of contention lies only in their ideas of the subjective
distinction of the human species. These likely stem from personal discomfort and
entrenched anthropocentric beliefs rooted in emotion and psychology. Based on these
varieties of angles of objections, it would be a mistake to treat all voices of scepticism as
a homogenous and use a one-size fits all approach.
Guides should firstly not attempt to engage in direct debate with visitors on the
debate of whether evolution or creationism ought to be the “correct” way of explaining
why life exists. Guides themselves might not be seen to have authority on both the theory
of evolution and creationism to engage in an informed debate. Therefore, attempts to
convince by falsifying the opposing point of view would only come across as defensive or
confrontational. An amicable way to solve the dispute is to acknowledge the NOMA that
is science and religion, in that it is not the purpose of science to provide such
philosophical and spiritual explanations on the meaning of life that is the prerogative of
religion (Gould, 2016). We also recommend guides not to attempt to proclaim the
coexistence of evolution and creationism. At best, the museum can only be considered a
scientific authority, and not a religious authority, and doing so may further complicate
misunderstandings. Therefore, as representatives of the museum, guides should,
regardless of their own religious faith, only focus on scientific knowledge and evidence.
The focus of guides at the museum should be therefore be on debunking misconceptions
about the theory of evolution, rather than debate about whether evolution or creationism
is “correct”.
On the other hand, a more proactive role can be pursued toward sceptics citing
scientific grounds of insufficient evidence, or those who find contention only in the place
of humans within the tree of life. It is possible to identify where is the supposed point of
contention or “missing link”, and direct visitors to resources and avenues from which
they can discover the pieces of evidence for themselves, such as in the archives and
collections of museums and photographs in databases, which can be linked on the
3
Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
museum website. For those who accept the entirety of evolutionary explanation of the
tree of life only up till the point of humans, the critical link between the human species
and the rest of all living things is one that can be further looked into, highlighting research
on the evolution of modern humans specifically, and our relation to evolutionary cousins
of a common ancestor. The museum can adopt an open and pro-active approach in
assisting in providing information and resources for those who seek to find it.
Hence, it is critical for us to first be cognisant that the objections to evolution stem
from complex factors of (mis)understandings of the nature of science, pre-existing
ideological biases, human emotion and psychology in order to endeavour toward a
proper and nuanced understanding of how to respond to them.
3. Potential Scenarios and Recommended Responses
Having established that different objections that may come from different points of
contention that may vary across individuals, we can now move on to identify potential
scenarios that may result in the gallery exhibits, and the course of action recommended
to guides to allay such concerns. These can broadly be classified into a lack of
understanding of the nature of science and inadequate factual knowledge. Although these
objections may be raised at any point in the entire museum, we highlight certain areas in
the museum in which they will most likely play out, and provide recommendations for
responses by gallery guides.
3.1 Lack of understanding of the nature of science
Broad objections may be raised against the theory of evolution as a whole, due to
popular misconceptions regarding the use of certain terms in science. One common
objection raised is that evolution is “just a theory”. When this is referenced, there is a
misconception among laypersons that Evolution is merely a guess, and not a fact.
However, a ‘theory’ in science is treated as the highest form of scientific explanation,
where it is a set of related ideas well-supported by natural observations, explaining
natural phenomena (Allmon, 2005). There thus is a need to educate people on the proper
meaning and usage scientific terms such as ‘theory’.
An area of possible contention where this happens is the Towards Animals zone, which
explains variety in form and function of organisms according to their developmental
patterns. There are also panels explaining the processes of natural selection and
speciation, the main processes through which evolution occur. When explaining the
processes of evolution, visitors may dismiss evolution as an unproven fact, but simply a
“theory”.
Guides should explain the definition of the word “theory” in the scientific context as
mentioned above, explaining that evolution is the one of the most widely accepted
theories in the scientific world.
3.2 Inadequate factual knowledge - Use of fossil evidence
Some visitors may contend that there is a lack of scientific evidence for evolution. This
could be attributed to a lack of understanding of the evidence for evolution (Allmon,
4
Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
2011). For instance, there is little understanding of how fossil records provide evidence
for the chronology of life (Allmon, 2011). Accompanying this lack of understanding could
lie several objections to the use of fossil records as evidence for the occurrence of
evolution, such as the uncertainty of the age of fossils and therefore evolution did not
occur long ago. Further, a common misconception is that fossils are rare and
unsystematically dispersed about a landscape (Nelson, 2008). Some also believe that
humans and dinosaurs coexisted (Almon, 2011). It is this lack of proper understanding of
evidence of evolution that may lead visitors into thinking that there is little scientific basis
for evolution.
Areas of possible contention are in Totem poles and Fossils such as that of dinosaurs
and trilobites. In the ‘When?’ panel of totem poles in every zone, where the appearance of
a particular taxon is shown on the evolutionary timescale, visitors might object to the
representation that life on earth began millions of years ago. Visitors might dispute the
fact that dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago during the Cretaceous-Palaeogene
extinction event due to the belief that humans and dinosaurs coexisted. More generally,
they could object to the age of the fossils displayed in many different zones, like that of
the trilobite being described as having existed 505 million years ago.
Guides can explain how fossil evidence provides consistent evidence for the
chronology of life, as the fundamental principle in using fossil evidence is superposition,
which is the fact that older layers of rock are found beneath younger ones (Allmon, 2005).
In this respect, the age of the fossils is not of the highest significance when considering
how evolution occurred. Applying the principle of superposition gives a comparative
sense of time in terms of which organisms existed in the different ages, and shows
changes in environmental conditions and organisms (Allmon, 2005). Guides can also
direct visitors to read descriptions on panels explaining fossil evidence, such as the ‘How
old are fossils?’ panel in the Dinosaurs zone, explaining dating methods that calculate
ages of rocks with precision.
3.3 Inadequate factual knowledge - Common ancestry
Proponents of creationism might argue that species were created in their current
form, including humans (Allmon, 2005). A common argument against evolution by
descent with modification is that there is an absence of transitional fossils to prove
relatedness of different taxa. As mentioned in Section 2, there are varying degrees to
which this view is advocated.
An area of possible contention is in the Tree of Life. In the Life zone of the museum,
there is a panel on the Tree of Life showing ancestry and relationships between all known
living and extinct species on Earth. The Tree of Life suggests that species arose from a
single common ancestor, through descent with modification. Some visitors who find the
Tree of Life contentious will likely call out the phylogenetic trees displayed in every zone
as being untrue as well.
In addition, in Survivors with culture, and in the Mammals zone, a panel addresses
human evolution by displaying the replicas of the skulls of both extinct and extant species
of organisms that are closely related to Homo sapiens, arranged on a timeline. There are
possibly individuals who may find that objections to evolution only arise in this section,
5
Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
when the theory of evolution is applied to humans. A common objection is that humans
could not have evolved from chimpanzees.
The museum has a key focus in presenting Southeast Asian biodiversity, according to
different taxa. In presenting biodiversity, there is first a need to understand how
organisms are grouped. The scientific explanation for grouping organisms together is
based on the fact that they have common ancestry. Organisms are grouped together not
just based on similarities, but similarities as a result of common ancestry. There is often
a misconception that the Tree of Life implies humans descended from other organisms.
However, the Tree of Life merely implies that humans and other organisms shared a
common ancestor (Baum, Smith & Donovan, 2005). In the same way, humans did not
evolve from chimpanzees, but shared a common ancestor that no longer exists (Johnson,
Smith, Pobiner & Schrein, 2012).
Claims on the lack of transitional fossils can be dealt with by gallery guides by bringing
the visitors to view the Archaeopteryx fossil in the Birds zone. It possess characteristics
of both modern birds and “reptiles”, showing the link between dinosaurs and birds.
4. Conclusion
In sum, our report has first proposed a statement on evolution that seeks to explain
the basic ideas, scientific credibility and explanatory power of the theory that ties in
together with its relevance and value to the museum’s mission of furthering
understanding of biodiversity. Following with an analytical breakdown of the diverse
ways in which responses to our statement, may be based on complex broader
conceptualisations of the nature, role, meaning of humanity, evolution and science, we
illuminate the necessity for more differentiated and nuanced ways of responding to such
objections. Finally, we identify potential scenarios of contention and outlined
recommendations to gallery guides in resolving them.
We therefore recognise that evolution is an essential yet difficult component to
include in the objective of public education by museums. Continued engagement is
necessary and fruitful to achieving better understanding of the wonders of Evolution and
diversity of life which fill our world today.
6
Wang Meirong Gina (A0113591L) and Angela Chan An Qi (A0131619L)
ULS2201: Evolution - Assignment 01 Report Writing
References
Allmon, W. (2005). Evolution and Creationism: A Guide for Museum Docents (2nd ed.).
Ithaca:
The
Paleontological
Research
Institution.
Retrieved
from
http://www.priweb.org/Evolution%20and%20Creationism.pdf
Allmon, W. D. (2011). Why don’t people think evolution is true? Implications for teaching,
in and out of the classroom. Evolution: Education and Outreach,4(4), 648-665.
Alters, B. J., & Alters, S. (2001). Defending evolution in the classroom: A guide to the
creation/evolution controversy. Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Baum, D. A., Smith, S. D., & Donovan, S. S. (2005). The tree-thinking challenge. Science,
310(5750), 979-980. Carnegie Museum of Natural History,. (2016). Affirming
Evolution : Carnegie Museum of Natural History. Carnegiemnh.org. Retrieved 10
February 2016, from http://www.carnegiemnh.org/science/default.aspx?id=8914
Gould,
S.
(2016). Stephen
Jay
Gould,
"Nonoverlapping
Magisteria,"
1997. Stephenjaygould.org.
Retrieved
10
February
2016,
from
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_noma.html
Johnson, N. A., Smith, J. J., Pobiner, B., & Schrein, C. (2012). Why are chimps still chimps?.
The american biology Teacher, 74(2), 74-80.
Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum,. (2016). About The Museum. Lkcnhm.nus.edu.sg.
Retrieved
10
February
2016,
from
http://lkcnhm.nus.edu.sg/nus/index.php/lkcnhm/aboutlkcnhm
National Teachers Association,. (2016). NSTA Position Statement: Evolution. Nsta.org.
Retrieved
10
February
2016,
from
http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/evolution.aspx
Nelson, C. E. (2008). Teaching evolution (and all of biology) more effectively: strategies
for engagement, critical reasoning, and confronting misconceptions. Integrative and
Comparative Biology, 48(2), 213-225.
The Institute for Creation Research,. (2016). The Scientific Case Against Evolution | The
Institute for Creation Research. Icr.org. Retrieved 10 February 2016, from
http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevoluti
on/
7