Quote:
|
Quote by: Prometheus Story by TIME: http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...089733,00.html
Bush wants ID to be taught alongside the science of evolutionary theory. Chalk another one up for a fundamentalist prez who can't see the difference between politics and religion. Just like his ridiculous stem cel stance.
My guess is that this will start a national debate like the one in Kansas.
I wonder is Bush is serious about pursuing this avenue. |
Actually the ID movement (or whatever) does have one very good point -
irreducible complexity. IR is actually a testable hypothesis, in many cases, and if it is sound then really all it says is that there are certain bimolecular structures that a gradualistic evolutionary approach cannot explain. Thus, I beleive, the extreme hatred of it by some.
Also, “religious activists” are not the only ones who think ID should be taught in schools as some of the key persons in the ID movement are not religious themselves. This can be seen William S. Harris’ (a Kansas City researcher who favors intelligent design) statement:
"Who's the designer?" asked Harris, a co-founder of Intelligent Design Network Inc. "I don't know."
Having heard some of the Kansas debate, I wouldn’t mind more of it, minus the incessant badgering of the witnesses by Irigonegaray.
I also think it is ironic that Jack Krebs said that the ID proponents “
have created a straw man. They are trying to make science stand for atheism so they can fight atheism” when, in fact, he was building a straw man of ID. And also he said “
It's clear from the beginning that this is not a real science discussion. This is a showcase for intelligent design” when it is clear that one of the reasons that this might not be a “real science discussion” is that he and his entire Kansas Citizens for Science boycotted the discussions. The anti-ID folks seem to be the ones not engaging is a science discussion here, not the ID folks, who attended the discussions and participated openly.