Why is it that only evolution suffers from "bottom up" protests. Normally debates about a scienctific theory take place amoung experts in the topic. Then it filters down to the research level, then the college level, then the high school level, and so forth. Why are IDers insisting that for evolution this process work the other way around? Is it because IDers can't debate real experts, so they just go straight to the kids? That's very cowardly.
That's pretty much it. They lost the debate with scientists before 1880. (the last anti-Darwin scientist was Agassiz 1807-1873)
No so.
The IDers want the research and debate conducted at the universities. Not the local secondary schools.
But evolutionists have escaped to the tall grass.
---snip---
Eugenie Scott argues that intelligent design proponents don’t have a scholarly position because they never submit their work for peer review. But each time she brings up the kind of scholarly evaluation that’s lacking -- the reviewed publications or academic conferences -- she stops short when she comes to the work of William Dembski.
Regarding conferences, Scott remembers Dembski’s “The Nature of Nature” conference (April 12-15 at Baylor) and grudgingly admits: “They actually did invite some scientists there.” In fact, the slate of speakers included two Nobel Prize-winning scientists and several members from the National Academy of Sciences. The list was weighted toward prominent biologists, physicists, and philosophers who were critical of intelligent design.
And when Scott ticks off a list of non-peer-reviewed design literature, she hesitates when she recalls that Dembski’s book, The Design Inference, was written as part of a Cambridge University philosophy of science series. Published as Dembski’s doctoral dissertation in philosophy, it became Cambridge’s best-selling philosophical monograph in recent years. After surviving a review of 70 scholars, and then the standard dissertation defense at the University of Illinois, The Design Inference finally underwent corrections and refereed scrutiny for two years at Cambridge University Press.
The great irony is that just as Dembski is proposing to test his theory with the help of molecular biologists, the very scientists who are challenging intelligent design to pass scientific tests are using every means possible to ensure those tests never take place.
---un snip----
The entire article is linked below
The Lynching of Bill Dembski: Scientists say the jury is out--so let the hanging begin.