It was a poor post. Other than raising Brian’s hackles, it didn’t really have enough ooomph to grab anybody.
Ally’s post on Dover inspired me to elaborate.
When I first read about the Dover statement about intelligent design, I shrugged.
The Dover folks were wrongheaded - there is nothing scientific about intelligent design (witness the Kansas’ school board’s need to redefine the word “science” in their curriculum). But the statement that people disagree about evolution is factual. So big deal.
In fact, good science teachers might use the issue to inspire their students. Students who actually look at the evidence will reject intelligent design. I have been following the “debate” for a while now, and every single time the ID folks show a “problem” with evolution - like irreducible complexity - it turns out that it isn’t really a problem. But understanding why the problem isn’t really a problem takes a bit of reading and some complex, hard thought. The ID folks know this, but also know that most people won’t take the time to read the complex studies. The ID proponents are fundementally dishonest. (The best example can be seen here with ID adocate Micheal Behe denying that scientists had answered the irreducibly complex problem of the immune system, whilst surrounded by over 50 papers that do just that. Great courtroom theatrics.) You also consistently see claims that the Dariwinians are fundamentalists who won’t tolerate challenges to their “dogma,” which ignores the very lively debate going on about mechanisms, as well as ignoring the awesome battles that took place at the turn of the century (See the book: Reef Madness). Scientists, aren’t dogmatic: they want proof. Their rejection of ID isn’t a evidence of a faith-based scientific community, it is evidence that ID doesn’t have any proof.
But more troubling than the bad science is the consequence of the dishonesty. Despite their “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” disclaimers, ID is being promoted only by creationists. Unfortunately, with our human tendency to generalize, many people will generalize the lying ID folks to the larger Christian community.
Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount lays out the most fundamental duty of Christians: bring people to Christ. Good people disagree about the best tactics to use in this mission. I would submit to you, my friends, that eggregious dishonesty will not convince many people.
And the Dover people are being eggregiously dishonest. Click through to my previous post and read those news articles. This isn’t an example of liberal MSM slandering the poor noble school board members. At least two school board members committed perjury to cover-up their fundamentalist Christian motivations in imposing ID. Lest you think I am cherry-picking evidence, here is a link to an index of all of the local paper’s trial coverage.
Ally: After reading those courtroom accounts, do you still feel that there was no religious motivation behind the school board’s “ID” platform?
