Eugenie Scott recently stated on NPR that real scientists should not debate ID in public because most people are "naive". Name calling and implying that the vast majority of people are stupid is a good sign that the end is in sight. This seems to be an opening for ID proponents because it makes clear that we are committed to a culture of rational discourse and the other side is not.
William Dembski blogged on this "foot-in-mouth" disease of Scott. Click HERE for the blog.
Earlier this week, two members of the Kansas Science Committee and one other member of the Board offered further revisions to the June 9 draft of the Science standards which essentially made that draft consistent with the Minority Report and the provisions that 23 experts validated during the hearings in May.
An article by Diane Carroll in the Kansas City Star provides an inaccurate description of the actions taken.
The article illustrates the strategy of the opposition evolving from "you are putting ID into the standards," to "you are putting in the standards a concept "friendly to ID." Since they are friendly to ID, they should not be allowed. This essentially means that criticisms of evolution are not allowed because all criticisms are going to be friendly to ID. This elevates evolution to the status of an ideology. Of course, the State can not promote an ideology.
One of the major misstatements in the Star article is relevant to this issue. The article incorrectly states that
"There was, however, at least some new language added to the standards. The following paragraph, offered by Bacon, was adopted: "We also emphasize that the science curriculum standards do not include intelligent design, the scientific disagreement with the claim of many evolutionary biologists that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion. While the testimony presented at the science hearings included many advocates of intelligent design, these standards neither mandate nor prohibit teaching about this scientific disagreement."
Substantively this is not a new addition.. The language has been in the minority report from inception:
"According to many scientists a core claim of evolutionary theory is that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion. Other scientists disagree. These standards neither mandate nor prohibit teaching about this scientific disagreement."
The language is significant because it provides a defintion of ID that shows on its face to be "scientific." Hence, even though ID is not being added, it is being appropriately defined.
Thanks to John Calvert for the clarifications above.
For the full article (you may need to register), click HERE.
The Weekly Standard weighs in on ID vs naturalism via Isaac Constantine.
For the entire article, click HERE.
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| << < | > >> | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Evolution has become a favorite topic of the news media recently, but for some reason, they never seem to get the story straight. The staff at Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture started this Blog to set the record straight and make sure you knew "the rest of the story".
A blogger from New England offers his intelligent reasoning.
We are a group of individuals, coming from diverse backgrounds and not speaking for any organization, who have found common ground around teleological concepts, including intelligent design. We think these concepts have real potential to generate insights about our reality that are being drowned out by political advocacy from both sides. We hope this blog will provide a small voice that helps rectify this situation.
Website dedicated to comparing scenes from the "Inherit the Wind" movie with factual information from actual Scopes Trial. View 37 clips from the movie and decide for yourself if this movie is more fact or fiction.
Don Cicchetti blogs on: Culture, Music, Faith, Intelligent Design, Guitar, Audio
Australian biologist Stephen E. Jones maintains one of the best origins "quote" databases around. He is meticulous about accuracy and working from original sources.
Most guys going through midlife crisis buy a convertible. Austrialian Stephen E. Jones went back to college to get a biology degree and is now a proponent of ID and common ancestry.
Complete zipped downloadable pdf copy of David Stove's devastating, and yet hard-to-find, critique of neo-Darwinism entitled "Darwinian Fairytales"
Intelligent Design The Future is a multiple contributor weblog whose participants include the nation's leading design scientists and theorists: biochemist Michael Behe, mathematician William Dembski, astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez, philosophers of science Stephen Meyer, and Jay Richards, philosopher of biology Paul Nelson, molecular biologist Jonathan Wells, and science writer Jonathan Witt. Posts will focus primarily on the intellectual issues at stake in the debate over intelligent design, rather than its implications for education or public policy.
A Philosopher's Journey: Political and cultural reflections of John Mark N. Reynolds. Dr. Reynolds is Director of the Torrey Honors Institute at
Biola University.