Proposed Intervening Section on Controversial New York Times Story   Rather than argue over the title or contents of the disputed second section regarding the pertinence of the controversial petition itself I propose to insert an intervening section about the controversy stirred up by the appearance of Kenneth Changs  story in the NY Times wherein Picards name is mentioned  The reason I find it necessary to do this is because some elements of Changs story which report claims of the DI have been blithely elevated to facthood without benefit of a critical examination of the reported claims  Here is my initial draft for the new section to appear below the biography and above the discussion of the controversial DI petition   Controversial New York Times Story  In February  the New York Times ran an investigative story Few Biologists but Many Evangelicals Sign AntiEvolution Petition by Kenneth Chang of the New York Times Science Desk reporting that the Discovery Institute had launched a new websiteDissent From Darwin to promote their expanded public relations campaign regarding how theories of evolution should be taught in public school  The new website included a list of signatories to an earlier petition which the Discovery Institute had termed A Scientific Dissent From DarwinismSignatories of A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism The petition dated back to  when it was first published by the Discovery Institute beneath an ad criticizing a forthcoming PBS series on evolution  Scientists Ad  The headline on the Discovery Institutes  ad was also A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism although the petition itself embedded at the bottom of the ad did not carry that label it bore no label at all  The untitled  version of the petition simply read We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged   Changs story disclosed that Professor Picards name appeared on the petition cited by the newly launched Dissent From Darwin website but the Times article did not distinguish which version she signed  Indeed Professor Picards name first appeared on the original  untitled twosentence petition and her name remained on the subsequent controversially yclept versions including the most recent one appearing on the new website  Changs story neither substantiated nor refuted the claims of the Discovery Institute that the twosentence petition supported or endorsed DIs slant on its meaning but the story did include a mixture of quotes from some of the people whose names appeared on the list at different times including some quotes that cast doubt on the Discovery Institutes characterization of all the petition signers as variously dissenters from Darwinism or antievolution  Changs story in conjunction with the Discovery Institutes website and its attached list of petition signers left a wake of confusion over who among the list of signers of the earlier versions of the petition agreed with or consented to the Discovery Institutes characterization of the petition signers as antievolution dissenters who presumably supported the emerging and evolving agenda of the Discovery Institute  It is at present unknown to what degree if any Picard agrees with or supports the Discovery Institutes controversial interpretation of the petition as dissent  It is also unknown whether Picard has ever supported any or all of the ongoing political agenda of the Discovery Institute  The last two sentences of the proposed new section reflect the absence of verifiable published information regarding the attitude of most of the original  signers  So far Wikipedia has only managed to obtain a reliably sourced comment from Stanley N Salthe who disputed DIs characterization and supplied his own salty attitude A plague on both their houses    Skip Evans of the NSCE similarly casts doubt on the DIs interpretation saying   The Statement The signatories appear to attest to a statement about the ability of natural selection to account for the complexity of life  in other words a statement about how evolution t