Friday, March 31, 2006

 

On Pigs and Lipstick

.
Things have gotten so bad for ID advocates that they have to try to snatch any sort of victory from the rubble back in Pennsylvania. Anthony Paul Mator is in World magazine trying to dress up the latest school board foolish enough to flirt with paying massive legal fees for little in the way of anti-evolutionist impact as some sort of sign of hope.

After noting both the political and legal victories for science education in Dover, and trotting out the obligatory kvetch about not being allowed to challenge "science's sacred dogma" with religious sacred dogma, Mator rather pathetically says:

But a Southern California school district on March 21 demonstrated that winter is over and spring is bringing new hope to ID proponents: The Lancaster, Calif., school board of trustees unanimously adopted a science policy that allows teachers to discuss problems in Darwin's theory. The new policy, while not calling for the teaching of ID, discourages a view of evolution as "unalterable fact."

While the policy is hardly benign, it is, compared to the Wedge Document’s aims of being in the midst of rectifying "ideological imbalance" in science curricula by the inclusion of design theory, a husk of the Discovery Institute’s dreams. As William Saletan described it, with brutal honesty:

The battleground has been reduced to public schools, and creationism has been reduced to intelligent design -- a pathetic, agnostic, empty shell. Creationists can't teach a dogma, so they "teach the controversy." They accept more and more of Darwin's theory, narrowing the dispute to isolated systems -- the eye, the flagellum, the blood-clotting system -- that they say Darwinism can't explain. They just want science to stop short of denying God's possibility. A little bit of mystery, a parcel of unspoiled divine wilderness, is all they ask.

Mator stumbles over the truth, even though he tries hard not to see it:

The Seattle-based Discovery Institute, a pro-ID think tank, endorses the strategy of exposing the holes in Darwinism rather than offering alternative theories. The reason: True scientific research acknowledges inconsistencies or gaps in data, but when ID is taught in the classroom, the public often perceives this as religious indoctrination.

Sometimes the public just gets it right.
.

Comments:
Okay, that's original enough and funny enough that I'm going to leave it. Though how you think spamming old posts on an obscure blog will help you at all, I cannoty imagine.
 
We are only guided by our dreams to reach the sky and our instinct guides us to take the plunge.
Pre-historic man utilized drawings of his hunt to depict
an everyday scene from his lifestyle. The issues with your
house require to be solved.

Feel free to visit my weblog :: Review of AskNow
 
"What an awesome post, I just read it from start to end. Learned something new after a long time
สูตรโกงบาคาร่า "
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

. . . . .

Organizations

Links
How to Support Science Education
archives