Thursday, February 09, 2006
A Dorothy for an Un-Kansas
.
I should say that my initial reaction is that no good can come from attempts by politicians to legislate what "science" is or what falls within its purview. This may sound like a nice change of pace from the drumbeat of anti-evolution legislation and curriculum actions, but it has all the earmarks of the work of the Perdition Paving Company. The only information on the proposed language I have found is the following:
Worse, perhaps, from the standpoint of pro-science people is the opportunity for rhetoric it gives to the IDeologists. William Dembski was quick out of the gate with this:
Unfortunately, ID has been winning the political battle across the country with rhetoric just this transparent. The Discovery Institute has been desperately searching for something . . . anything . . . to divert attention from the Debacle in Dover. It isn’t necessarily the best strategy to give them a political sideshow to rally the troops around just when they were on the run.
Oh, and one last note I can’t resist: Rob Crowther, director of communications for the Discovery Institute, and frequent comic relief in the ID camp had this to say:
But, hey, then they would actually have to do some science . . .
A Wisconsin state Representative, Terese Berceau, has proposed a bill in the state Assembly to prevent the teaching of creationism or Intelligent Design as science in Wisconsin public schools. Alan Attie, a biochemistry professor at UW-Madison and a supporter of the bill, said "We can be the un-Kansas."
I should say that my initial reaction is that no good can come from attempts by politicians to legislate what "science" is or what falls within its purview. This may sound like a nice change of pace from the drumbeat of anti-evolution legislation and curriculum actions, but it has all the earmarks of the work of the Perdition Paving Company. The only information on the proposed language I have found is the following:
The bill would stipulate that "any material presented as science within the school curriculum ... is testable as a scientific hypothesis and describes only natural processes [and] ... is consistent with any description or definition of science adopted by the National Academy of Sciences."
That "testable as a scientific hypothesis" is potentially troublesome from a philosophy of science standpoint, as possibly inviting simplistic divisions into "science" on one side of a deceptively "plain" line and "pseudoscience" on the other, while ignoring difficult to categorize areas such as string theory. PZ Myers has the same take on this from the perspective of a scientist.
Worse, perhaps, from the standpoint of pro-science people is the opportunity for rhetoric it gives to the IDeologists. William Dembski was quick out of the gate with this:
William Dembski, one of the leading proponents of Intelligent Design, described Berceau's proposed legislation as "a clear sign that we are winning." Critics of Intelligent Design "look foolish when they have to take political action to quash ID," he stated on his weblog. ...
Some ID proponents have resorted to political measures in order "to break up that monopoly," Dembski acknowledged, but "for materialistic evolution to require legislation to preserve its monopoly will in the end be seen as heavy-handed and self-serving. ...
"[F]or academics with stellar reputations like [Elliott] Sober and [Ronald] Numbers [who attended Berceau's news conference] to be actively supporting such political interference signifies that they are losing not only the war of ideas but also their position of cultural dominance," Dembski said. ...
"Unlike Dover, where the focus was on ID's legitimacy as science, such a trial [in Wisconsin] would focus on the exclusive right of evolutionary theory to maintain its monopoly over the teaching of biological origins.... [T]his will be a much more difficult case for the ACLU to win. In Dover, ID needed to defend itself. In such a case [in Wisconsin], evolution will need to defend itself. ...
"Dover certainly wasn't ID's Waterloo. Wisconsin may well be evolution's Waterloo," Dembski said.
Of course, this is straight runoff from the swine showers, with the typical creationist "heads we win, tails you lose" ploy of excusing their resort to legislative action to promote their so-called "science" but claiming that the use of laws to protect science education is evidence that ID is winning something more than a political battle. Ignore ‘em and it’s because you have no answer to their claims, pay attention to ‘em and it’s proof that there really is a scientific dispute.
Unfortunately, ID has been winning the political battle across the country with rhetoric just this transparent. The Discovery Institute has been desperately searching for something . . . anything . . . to divert attention from the Debacle in Dover. It isn’t necessarily the best strategy to give them a political sideshow to rally the troops around just when they were on the run.
Oh, and one last note I can’t resist: Rob Crowther, director of communications for the Discovery Institute, and frequent comic relief in the ID camp had this to say:
We think it is a scientific theory. There are a lot of scientists and scholars doing a lot of research on the topic in research institutions. Any effort to stifle the subject really ultimately harms the work they're doing. We see this as an academic freedom issue, not just for teachers, but for scientists.
If the IDologists would just stop setting up their "research institutions" in K-12 schools and hiding all those "scientists and scholars" there, instead of having them out and publishing in the scientific journals, they wouldn’t have to worry about being evicted from high schools and maybe they could have demonstrated some real research results over the last decade and a half to Judge Jones in the Dover case.
But, hey, then they would actually have to do some science . . .
.
Comments:
<< Home
While I agree with and even applaud the attitude, I still doubt the wisdom of the particular method. Leaning on the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction to do a proper job might be a better avenue.
Post a Comment
<< Home
