I don’t want to beat a dead horse here, tpanther, but ID has not done anything to suggest that it’s science. It tries to poke holes in existing scientific thought, which is fair, and actually a very good thing.
But “criticism of evoltion” does not equate to “ID is correct.”
It’s not even an either/or question. Let’s suppose evolution is wrong. That doesn’t prove anything else. It doesn’t even suggest anything else. ID needs to provide evidence, instead of criticism, to even qualify as science.
I don’t mind if it’s taught in public schools, but it shouldn’t be a required class nor classified as science, because it’s not science. If we decide that the public schools can offer classes in islam, the Christian Bible, or whatever, that’s okay with me.
Well said.
Never asserted any such thing personally. You sure seem defensive with all the strawmen today!
And how is it you define science? Don’t we first have to at least do THAT in order to define what will be included, discluded...and how then would you decide in the future if ID is or isn’t science, if all anyone hears is “that’s not science”?
Cell phones were probably considered science fiction when first dreamed up and most likely dismissed by some. Maybe we’ll never levitate but it’s less likely to happen if people are so scared and insecure if they shout the sky is falling every time someone proposes such a thing!
The reality is that evolution isn’t the victim here. Stein merely exposes the liberal academics that think they ARE God, OR GOD’S GIFT, scientifically speaking.
Just because you don’t see things, doesn’t mean they’re not there.
It IS good to poke holes and discuss as you point out, MY WHOLE point is this is all too often disallowed, not only in science classes, but the entire school in general...from k-12 and beyond.
And it’s NOT the Bible-thumping theocrats doing the banning!
Put it this way, who gets to define Religion? For that matter Christianity? Catholics? Protestants? Mormons? Just like there are differeing opinions between theologians we have differing opinions between scientists.
Why do only those closed to the idea of ID get to define science?
What’s the big deal, and no one is proposing people be somehow FORCED to learn ID as scientific theory, but what if they choose to ask scientific questions about it, one way or another? It’s not like grade school science class spends weeks and weeks on creation, big bang, etc., let alone will somehow proselytize kids just because they believe one theory or anohter is more or less likely!
PLENTY of very educated scientists believe in a creator, but you actually propose they not whisper such an idea while engaged in science classses, that is until they can PROVE it, meanwhile that which is just as unproveable, evolution, is A-OK to talk about until the cows come home?