- Located in Bedford, MA
- D.Phil. in zoology from Oxford University
- Teaches human anatomy and physiology
- Senior lecturer in biology at Curry College in Milton, MA
- Interviewed on National Public Radio and Public Radio International
- Has presented at numerous colleges and humanist societies
- Presents UnIntelligent Design: Why Evolution Explains the Human Body and 'Intelligent Design' Does Not
A few years ago, Dr. Hafer realized that Intelligent Design is a political pressure group, not a scientific issue. With this figured out, she realized that what we need is political-style arguments in defense of evolution. Her presentation "Unintelligent Design" contains bulletproof science, but is short, easy to understand, easy to repeat, and makes the opposition look bad. As an instructor of anatomy and physiology, coming up with five parts of the human body that don't work very well wasn't hard. Her knowledge of zoology enabled her to think of other animals that got better body parts, leaving one to ask: who does god like better-us or squid? This talk contains both science and comedy, and is very accessible for non-scientists. It was very popular at the AHA conference in June 2009.
Dr. Hafer's primary presentation is Unintelligent Design, but she can also present on other evolution-related topics such as:
Animals That Shouldn't Exist, According to Intelligent Design
One of the great things about evolution is the sheer weirdness of its results. I discuss some animals that you just shouldn't go to your grave without knowing about, and I discuss some of the philosophical conundrums implied by their very existence. Find out about some of the most lovable and fascinating members of the animal kingdom, and why they knock some of our most fondly-held ideas into a cocked hat.
Biology and Intelligent Design--They Really Speak Different Languages (and I can prove it)
Intelligent Design (ID) claims to be science. When you read papers by ID authors, they often use scientific-sounding language. However, the papers often seem to rely too heavily on argumentation and lack the use of, or even reference to, data. In this talk, I quantify this problem in a carefully dispassionate way and come up with some very interesting results. I also discuss the Discovery Institute's fundamental antipathy to science, as revealed by the Wedge document.
If you're interested in having this speaker come to your school and give a presentation, click here to fill out our online Speaker Request form.