So, what is this Project Steve anyway? Project Steve is a ruse created by diehard evolutionists to help them hide from the public the fact that the actual evidence is stacked against evolution, the actual reason why to this day they continue to refuse to accept the challenge issued in the text of the Scientific Dissent on Darwinism. In other words, their response to that invitation to having an honest debate on evolution in a public forum was a propaganda device meant to cover up for their inability to address the many problems with Darwin's theory.
Concocted by a group of scientists of dubious ethics and analytic abilities acting as if they were the supreme authority in the matter, Project Steve represents indisputable evidence evolutionists do not want to be put in a situation where they have to respond publicly to the pertinent criticism of Darwin’s theory issued by other scientists. To draw attention away from that, they decided that unlike in the case of the Dissent issued by Discovery Institute, only scientists named Steve or whose name was similar to Steve were allowed to sign under their proclamation.
This was the NCSE’s Project Steve response to the Scientific Dissent on Darwinism:
Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to “intelligent design,” to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation’s public schools. (Project Steve, ncse.com)
The first question one would need to ask NCSE is why call evolution fact when according to your Project Steve “there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution.” In other words, on what basis do they claim “there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred” when they admit scientists cannot even agree on how evolution works? For if you don’t know what “patterns and processes” are associated with evolution, common sense says when you state that “evolution occurred,” this is an assumption, not a scientific fact.
Secondly, if “the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry,” where is the common ancestor? Why one hundred and sixty years after Darwin published a book deceptively titled On the Origin of Species no one has figured out yet the identity of that alleged common ancestor? Contrary to what NCSE’s Project Steve claims, otherwise a well-known fact even among evolutionists, overwhelming scientific evidence leads to the conclusion that same as the six-day creation in the Bible, common ancestry is another unproven evolutionary assumption based on the assumption that biological gradualism, for which we have zero real evidence, is how we got our millions of species.
And how is natural selection “a major mechanism in its occurrence” when even the most vocal among the supporters of evolution had to admit natural selection is not a real player. Ironically, as you are going to see, no other than Project Steve’s patron, Stephen Jay Gould, made it very clear, before he would contradict himself, again, natural selection is a figment of an evolutionist’s imagination.
Then why is intelligent design “creationist pseudo-science” when one of the leading scientists making the case for design, Michael Behe, is a university professor, a molecular biologist who happens to be a declared rejector of creationism. In Darwin’s Black Box he builds a solid case for intelligent design with the help of an abundance of certified scientific data anyone could look at and analyze, and not once is he making references to something that could even remotely be construed as religion. Intelligent design is not religion because some religious leaders decided to use it, before they recanted on their argument, to make the case for a designer god. After all, for pure political reasons many churches have also decided these days to endorse evolution. Does that make evolution religion? It does not, and yet, since the pro-evolution argument is actually entirely based on belief, for many out there this is precisely what evolutionism is.
Last but not the least Project Steve statement says that to debate over the validity of the theory of evolution would be “pedagogically irresponsible.” According to NCSE, doubting Lady Evolution to her face in science class is bad manners and a scientific debate over the premises for the conclusions reached by Darwin would be “inappropriate.” Who knew Evolution was so thin-skinned, and that the only ones to be allowed to enter debates should be individuals that have similar opinions on the topic debated over? Of course, claiming criticism of evolution is "pedagogically irresponsible" and "inappropriate" was about evolutionists covering up for the many false claims made in support of evolution and about the academia disallowing dissenting voices to be heard in schools and universities in order to protect the status quo.
Their attitude is similar to religious cults forbidding an internal debate over the religious dogma. There is also a not so subtle threat of excommunication and of experiencing all sorts of dire consequences when found guilty of apostasy."