Political Games - Where the fuck’s the reset button?

So, on the topic we’ve been discussing below, the AFA has a poll up. It’s not a fair poll. It’s bullshit. The options suck. Option 1 is “children should be exposed to ID”, while Option 2 is “Only evolution should be taught“. That’s not fair wording. I don’t have any problem with Id [or hell, even freaking creationism] being mentioned in a bio class, thus exposing children to it [as Eugene mentioned below], IN GENERAL. However, ID is not science. I’m sorry, but it’s not. Why? It starts with a preconceived idea: God created the universe. ID-ers argue: “No! We think life and the evidence show intelligent design!” At which case I like to reference my own Neo-Pagan friend who has a Genesis story of his own, and ask if we should include that in the course. A variation of “Hell no!” is the typical response, which just marks them as hypocrites.

But back to the poll. What are they really asking? They’re asking “Should ID be taught alongside evolution as an equal scientific theory?” That’s what ID-ers want. They want labels on textbooks saying evolution is “only” a theory, not truth [so’s gravity, and the idea that the earth revolves around the sun; should we put that on freaking physics textbooks, too?]. No shit it’s only a theory: that’s what all science is. Sure, some theories have more piles of evidence than others, but the piles for evolution are very very high.

Eugene, you also threw up a small strawman argument [even though you were mostly agreeing]: you stated that the best we can do is say that life probably occured by chance. As you [should] know, evolutionary theory does not simply deal with how life occured: it deals with how the lifeforms on this planet have changed and are changing. ID-ers don’t just reject the idea that life began by chance [side note: evolutionary theory doesn’t rule out some [set of] being[s] creating life on this planet… through evolution! argh! sorry, pet peeve…]; they reject the idea entire idea of life changing and evolving over time. This is what really irks me the most, because they have observed this [particularly microevolution]. Sorry to pick on you, Euge, I was gonna bring it up anyway, but your comment gave me some context.

Now, if I was doing a poll with only 2 options [shudder], they’d be:

Option A: Alternative theories to accepted modern science should be taught with equal emphasis given to alternative and accepted scientific theories.

Option B: While alternative ideas and proposals may/should be mentioned in class, only accepted scientific theories should be taught and fully covered.

This is a fair poll, as it expresses the real debate here. Almost every evolutionist I’ve read/talked to, whule completely rejecting ID and creationism or whatever else they want to try naming it as legitimate scientific theories, have no problem with Option B. Why? It’s fair, and it keeps the science in science class.

So go vote on the poll; I obviously want you to vote for the 2nd option, cause the AFA is a bunch of spin-sters, but if you really think ID should be given equal time in science class… by all means, vote for option 1.

p.s. Euge: Roger is a good friend. One of the Brains. You know.
p.p.s. I completely disagree with you that only those going into a technical field should have an understanding of the science. For a scientific reference, see Feynman. Furthermore, by shortchanging those not going into a technical field, we only contribute to the ignorance of society. It’s not that they have to believe in evolution: but hell, they should understand it so they can at least argue against it without throwing up strawman and misconception after strawman and misconception.

Share This