Thursday, May 05, 2005

Kansas Evolution Debate, part deux

From the NY Times:
In the first of three daylong hearings characterized here as the direct descendant of the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a parade of Ph.D.'s testified today about the flaws they find in Darwin's theory of evolution, transforming a small auditorium into a forum on one of the most controversial questions in education and politics: How to teach about the origin of life?

The hearings by the Kansas State Board of Education- one part science lesson, one part political theater - were set off by proposed changes to Kansas's science standards intended to bring a more critical approach to the teaching of Darwinism. The sessions provided perhaps the highest-profile stage yet for the emerging movement known as intelligent design, which asserts that life is so intricately complex that an architect must be behind it. Critics argue that intelligent design has no basis in science and is another iteration of creationism.


But the debate was as much about religion and politics as science and education, with Mr. Irigonegaray pressing witnesses to find mentions of the theories they were denouncing, like humanism and naturalism, in the state standards, and asking whether they believe all scientists are atheists.

"These people are going to obfuscate about these definitions," complained Jack Krebs, vice president of the pro-evolution Kansas Citizens for Science, whose members, wearing "I support strong science education" buttons, filled many of the 180 auditorium seats not taken by journalists from as far away as France. "They have created a straw man. They are trying to make science stand for atheism, so they can fight atheism."

Doesn't science stand for atheism? I thought that, since they can't see or touch God, true scientists can't believe in God nor can they pose the theory that God exists. Of course that must mean that Nero didn't exist either since we only read about him in books.

Oh well. Like I said earlier, I don't want our public schools teaching religion in the classroom, but most people believe that everything was the result of a master creator...that's not fiction or religious dogma. If God is a fact, and he in fact created the world, why would we teach otherwise? You have to at LEAST mention that some people believe that the world was the product of an intelligent designer while others believe we evolved from sea scum.


Post a Comment

<< Home