Replies

Turner asks, “What, then, is the harm in allowing teachers to deal with the subject as each sees fit?” ID can't be taught, he explains, because most scientists believe that "normal standards of tolerance and academic freedom should not apply in the case of ID." He says that the mere suggestion that ID could be taught brings out "all manner of evasions and prevarications that are quite out of character for otherwise balanced, intelligent and reasonable people."

And he is spot on. But here are the Predicted responses: He's not a "real" scientist (whatever that means); his school sucks so he doesn't count; he hasn't published enough papers; and a couple screens of cut-n-pastes.

He says that the mere suggestion that ID could be taught brings out "all manner of evasions and prevarications that are quite out of character for otherwise balanced, intelligent and reasonable people."

How about the fact that there's no scientific evidence in favor of ID, and the subject being taught is science? If there were such evidence, then that would translate into positive scientific evidence for the existence of God, and that doesn't exist. Just like there's no scientific evidence of the existence of Allah, or Zeus, or Thor, or ghosts. Sure, Jesus existed, but so did Mohamed. That a person existed doesn't validate all the stories told about them. There are lots of whoppers told about people who existed in History.