Replies

So what? What about plate tectonics? Geologists argued confidently that continents were immovable. Good thing you weren't around then.

And again, all I keep hearing is how ID has been discredited and rejected. How? Why? What is the bullet through the brain (or heart)?

Rejected, old ideas? Hmmm, something else comes to mind. Can't quite put my finger on it.

Geologists argued confidently that continents were immovable. Good thing you weren't around then.

I was around then. In fact I took college geology before plate tectonics. The mechanism now called plate tectonics was unknown, but the movement of continents was known from many lines of evidence.

Geologists argued confidently that continents were immovable. Good thing you weren't around then.

But plate techtonics was not taught in school back then, nor should it have been. Only once it was accepted by scientists (i.e., once it had survived the challenges raised against it) did it become appropriate fare for a public science class.

And again, all I keep hearing is how ID has been discredited and rejected. How? Why?

Because it's not testable and it has no predictive power. End of story, as far as science is concerned. If and when that changes, scientists may give it a second look. Some time later, it may gain some acceptance. Then and only then will it be appropriate to begin the debate about whether to teach it to children.

There is a huge host of tentatively accepted, scientifically worthwhile ideas which are debated and discussed in the scientific journals, but which are not ready for a school curriculum.