SCIENCE
We’ve been having a mini-discussion here in Albuquerque about the local city of Rio Rancho deciding to take a step toward including Intelligent Design in their school curiculum. Of course, as they do, the ID people haven’t tried to actually include ID in the classroom as such. Instead, they’ve tried to weaken support for evolution in the classroom as a precursor to putting ID in later. Our newspaper (the Albuquerque Journal) seems to be on the side of the ID people since probably 75% of the letters they publish are pro-ID or anti-evolution (the same thing really since ID has literally nothing going for it so their only way forward is trying to knock evolution, the same tactic they tried for years when they had the courage of their convictions and called it creationism). To contribute to the side of science and logic I sent the following letter in to the Journal.
—
The recent letters on the Rio Rancho Intelligent Design issue show one thing for sure, science and reason have already been dealt a blow by the ID crowd and they haven’t even been successful in getting their doctrine into the schools. The fact that people still think that evolution is in any way a controversial topic shows a real failure for science education in this country.
It also shows the power of the word games ID proponents play. Once you notice the game, you can’t help but see it every time in everything they say. The game goes like this: First you say something about evolution that is clearly wrong or is based on a misunderstanding. Then when a scientist corrects the incorrect statement you say “Look, we have a disagreement! This shows there’s some controversy!” Combine this game with the frankly dismal state of science education and it’s clear why perfectly reasonable people are hoodwinked by the ID “debate” when there is no real debate to be had.
The idea that thousands of scientists in dozens of related fields have, for decades, been pushing an idea that they didn’t have proof of just because it’s become a “religion” to them is preposterous. If a scientist had come up with 1 iota of evidence for Intelligent Design or something that disproved evolution they would recieve the Nobel Prize. Evolution has a mountain of evidence from every related field and decades of research all pointing to it and only it as the theory. Before ID is taught in science classrooms there must be some proof of it. Something, some morsel of evidence or a credible hypothosis must be put forth. Speculation, mathematical noodlings, and word games do not a science make.
—
tags: grommes, evolution,intelligent+design
—
The recent letters on the Rio Rancho Intelligent Design issue show one thing for sure, science and reason have already been dealt a blow by the ID crowd and they haven’t even been successful in getting their doctrine into the schools. The fact that people still think that evolution is in any way a controversial topic shows a real failure for science education in this country.
It also shows the power of the word games ID proponents play. Once you notice the game, you can’t help but see it every time in everything they say. The game goes like this: First you say something about evolution that is clearly wrong or is based on a misunderstanding. Then when a scientist corrects the incorrect statement you say “Look, we have a disagreement! This shows there’s some controversy!” Combine this game with the frankly dismal state of science education and it’s clear why perfectly reasonable people are hoodwinked by the ID “debate” when there is no real debate to be had.
The idea that thousands of scientists in dozens of related fields have, for decades, been pushing an idea that they didn’t have proof of just because it’s become a “religion” to them is preposterous. If a scientist had come up with 1 iota of evidence for Intelligent Design or something that disproved evolution they would recieve the Nobel Prize. Evolution has a mountain of evidence from every related field and decades of research all pointing to it and only it as the theory. Before ID is taught in science classrooms there must be some proof of it. Something, some morsel of evidence or a credible hypothosis must be put forth. Speculation, mathematical noodlings, and word games do not a science make.
—
tags: grommes, evolution,intelligent+design