« Did Mark Twain Really Say This?
Main
Oh, For the Peace and Joy of the Monastic Life at this Blessed Time of Year »
December 19, 2006
A Bad Year for Creationists
John Lynch at Stranger Fruit has a month by month chronicle of events ending with today's defeat in the Cobb Country (GA) disclaimer case. In fact, December has been a particularly bad month for creationists. Only May seems to have been good for them because they apparently didn't say anything stupid in May and no one slapped them down in May. Take a look through John's list of events and discredited creationist's claims.
But these are only victorious battles where science and reason has been able to hold ground. Until the thought pattern of a significant portion of the US population can be changed, scientists and people of reason will fight these battles over and over. We don't need to turn everyone into a scientist. I'm not one. All we need to do is make sure that everyone understands that theologians, lawyers, marketeers, engineers etc. are not scientists and that it is reasonable to assume that scientists know more about their particular science than most other people are willing to learn.
Dembski was surely wrong to say back in January that,
Judge Jones's decision is likely to prove a blessing for the intelligent design movement, spurring its proponents to greater heights and thereby fostering its intellectual vitality and ultimate success.
But our side needs an offense and not just a defense if we are ever to be able to move beyond these continuing scrimmages. And that offense needs to work in the court of public opinion and not just in the courts of scientific debate and of law.
Posted by Duane Smith at December 19, 2006 9:25 PM | Read more on Evolution |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1973
Comments
You are absolutely right about needing an offense as well as a defense. One example of a good offense is taking action on science standards and textbooks. For those of us who are pro-science it's not just about evolution. Evolution is just the favorite target of the anti-science crowd.
Here in Florida, Florida Citizens for Science (of which I'm a board member) is preparing to get actively involved in drafting new science standards, and we're keeping an eye on textbooks.
The point is not just to keep creationism out--that's necessary, but not adequate. We need well-written content that accurately teaches the theory of evolution. Too many textbooks avoid it, I suspect in order to avoid controversy.
Posted by: Henry Neufeld at December 20, 2006 4:05 AM
Actually, it looks to be going quite well for Creationism: Evolution remains dependent on theologians and lawyers to stay afloat.
Posted by: Looney at December 24, 2006 8:42 AM
Actually, it looks to be going quite well for Creationism: Evolution remains dependent on theologians and lawyers to stay afloat. Most of the science community is terrified to speak the truth: evolution is just warmed over spontaneous generation.
Posted by: Looney at December 24, 2006 8:44 AM
Looney,
I'm baffled by your remarks about "spontaneous generation." Modern biological evolutionary theory says nothing about the origin of the first rudiment biological system(s). Evolution explains the diversity of life not its origin. Various contemporary hypotheses concerning how life first arose do not assume "spontaneous generations" either. As these ideas are developed and tested they may or may not integrate into current evolutionary theory. My guess is that they will but who knows how it may turn out. Those studying the origins of life seek natural explanations. But that is what science does. It seeks a natural explanation for natural phenomena. Please stop confusing evolution with ideas about the origin of life. Such discussion is not helpful to the discussion of either and it shows that you have not done your homework.
Posted by: Duane at December 24, 2006 10:20 AM
Answer: Miller-Urey. It was on my kids SAT2 biology test and is only meaningful to those who believe in spontaneous generation. 100% pure spontaneous generation.
Those who develop evolutionary theories are completely distinct from those who develop the technological wonders that make our society run. Evolutionists are parasites: The credibility of the real world technology is projected onto their ideology.
Posted by: Looney at December 25, 2006 8:53 AM
I should add that "evolution" is a synonym for "change". "It evolved" has all of the scientific substance of saying "it happened". You can explain anything with this. It is a perfect vacuum of scientific understanding - nothing but sophistry.
Posted by: Looney at December 25, 2006 10:43 AM
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.
Send me an email if it is important.