I.D. and the Unintelligent Debate

Verlyn Klinkenborg had an excellent editorial in the New York Times today that is one of the best syntheses I've read in recent time about the "evolution discussion." Rather than try to synopsize her thoughts, just have a read from the source.

My hope is that this issue will die quickly so that people can move on to discussions that help us move forward as a culture. For now, people have chosen to reawaken a medieval debate about a campaign that doesn't deserve to be called "a theory."

A scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory.

Intelligent Design and Creationism are not scientific, nor are they theories. ID&C (which are one and the same in essence) are as much a science as alchemy is. An insubstantial attack on a well-tested theory does not implicitly deem the attack scientific. It does not even make it credible.

I hestitate to quote a comedian, but I think Bill Maher hit the nail right on the head Friday night when he said:

The reason there is no real debate is that Intelligent Design isn't real science. It's the equivalent of saying that the Thermos keeps hot things hot and cold things cold because it's a god... Stupidity isn't a form of knowing things..."Babies comes from storks" is not a competing school of thought in medical school. We shouldn't teach both; the media shouldn't equate both.

This should not become a war of beliefs, nor should this be a battle of religions. Whether you believe in science should not preclude you from finding comfort and peace in religion. However, the fact that 45% of this country chooses to ignore tested and established theories of Earth's age (4.5 billion years old) in favor of the Bible (which says Earth is less than 10,000 years old) frightens me dearly. We are rejecting testable knowledge in favor of a claim that has no proof. There is no proof.

With each generation, cultures amend their collective knowledge with a revised--and hopefully improved--set of facts and conclusions. Even the apparently immutable Catholic Church has changed its mind on positions. As scary and disturbing as it might be for some, science has helped generate new information that can lead to these position changes.

Over time, people have allowed the strongest explanations of our existence on this planet to drive our understanding of the universe. Now an emboldened few are trying to convince the vulnerable masses otherwise. And they are not supplying us with the second strongest theory, or the third strongest.

Instead, the so-called "alternative" they provide is untestable, unreliable, and truly unscientific. That so many are giving this movement its chance to destroy our education and our science is simply unbelievable.