The theory hypothesis of intelligent design
I'm in Pensacola for the weekend, so the blog is really a low priority. Nevertheless, this letter in the NY Times really merits attention:
To the Editor:
Re "In Kansas, Darwinism Goes on Trial Once More" (news article, May 6):
Darwin's theory of evolution cites plenty of scientific evidence to support the hypothesis that species evolve to fit their environments. The religious conservatives who are pushing "intelligent design" try to pass it off as scientific theory, when it is actually just hypothesis.
Actual evidence is necessary to qualify as scientific theory. This is an important distinction that seems to have been lost in the political theatrics of the Kansas State Board of Education.
William R. Hall
Wayne, N.J., May 6, 2005
posted by Schroeder @ 10:07 PM
4 comments
4 Comments:
It's late. One minor point: I heard on NPR today that the main advocate of ID argued in Kansas that (and I reserve the right to be wrong) said advocates remained unconvinced that primates like apes were somehow unrelated to humans, or "other hominids." Gee, there's not just the photographic evidence but also the behavioral evidence. Never mind the DNA.
Certainly Bush provides an interesting specimen to compare to apes. But faith in science is blasphemy. Only blind allegiance to dogmatic evangelists can reveal truth.
Y'all might get some twisted pleasure from checking out this website:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
They're even building their own Creation Museum.
P.S. Mixter's Mix has a funny post on the Creation Museum:
http://mixtersmix.blogspot.com/2005/05/when-will-they-finish-it-already.html
I discovered these Answers in Genesis folks when I was looking for links on wholphins (half-dolphin, half-whale hybrids) and found that they had a explanation for why hybrids such as wholphins were consistent with Creationsim.
Post a Comment
<< Home