« Forbes.com Doing Very Well Under Free Model |
Main
| Congressman Opposing Municiple Telecom Will Benefit Financially »
June 13, 2005
Intelligent Design: It's Not Just for Biology Anymore
Posted by Ernest Miller
First they came after biology
and I did not speak out
because I was not a biologist
Then they came after geology
and I did not speak out
because I was not a geologist
Then they came after astronomy
and I did not speak out
because I was not an astronomer
They they came after my discipline
and there was no one left
to speak out for my discipline.
The anti-evolution, pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute reveals that it is not simply Darwin's theory that is in their crosshairs, but virtually all of science (New York Times Should Screen "Privileged Planet" for Its Staff):
Although much of the public controversy over intelligent design has focused on the application of design to biology, it's important to remember that design theory itself reaches well beyond biology, and that some of the strongest evidence for design comes from such fields as physics, astronomy, and cosmology.
When they go after these other disciplines they're going to use the same bogus arguments and reasoning that they've used in their assault on evolution. "Teach the controversy." "There are holes in the theory, they can't answer everything." "It's only a theory, not a fact." "You can't
prove it." If we don't stop them from corrupting science in the biology classroon, how are we to stop them from corrupting science in the entire curriculum?
Read more at Pharyngula (A New Recruit).
Comments (7)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Evolution
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 23
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 22
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 21
- › Kitchen Academy - The Hollywood Cookbook and Guest Chef Michael Montilla - March 18th
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 20
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 19
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 18
- › Salsa Verde
Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @
1. Nomen Nescio on June 13, 2005 10:19 AM writes...
er, ahem. "astronomer", not "astronomist". otherwise, bravo!
Permalink to Comment2. Ernest Miller on June 13, 2005 10:23 AM writes...
Thanks, fixed.
Permalink to Comment3. Bas Burger on June 14, 2005 07:00 AM writes...
They will take as much of the public platform as they can to promote their back to the 9th century approach. Do not take the wrong steps and debate with them, they want that, it's a trap. Best to do is prooving, by pulling the rug from underneath them, that they are wrong. Also debate with investors, but do not debate with creationists, and certainly not when investors are the audience.
btw, everything we see around us is result of science, not some fague garbage like creationism.
Maybe vote other people in office can be a solution, if that does not work then I am afraid moving and let creationists debate with themselfs is an option.
Sorry, but I am not able to help you voting out the current administration as I have no voting rights in the US, otherwise I would have helped you and your colleagues.
Permalink to Comment4. simon on June 14, 2005 08:27 PM writes...
Please take a breadth and stop practicing the fine art of alarmism ... Science will march forward despite ID theory or for that matter evolution theory as it currently stands ... as long as we continue to challenge theory with reality progress will continue ...
Your concern for American schools is also off ... They were long ago eclipsed by third world schools ... The education system long before ID came along sold reason for feeling good and student self-esteem ...
Permalink to Comment5. Luke Lea on June 17, 2005 01:59 PM writes...
So how do you guys deal with the so-called "fine tuning problem" in physics? I would say it is the only evidence for design, at least if parsimony is the criterion. Anthropic principle anyone?
Permalink to Comment6. EB on June 17, 2005 02:27 PM writes...
Luke Lea, several counter arguments to the fine-tuning argument are at this page: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI301.html
Permalink to Comment7. DC on June 17, 2005 04:36 PM writes...
You got it right. The ID people need to bring all science down because science is an integrated whole. Biology is consistent with the rest of science, so doubt needs to be cast on all of it. All scientists need to understand that this faith-based nonsense is not just a problem for biologists.
Permalink to Comment