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?
It may shock you to learn that I believe in a Creator, for evolution offers no convincing evidence of how life began, only how it evolved on this planet after it began.
I believe in God. I am also a Christian, although not a terribly good one. I get irritated a little too easily, but I also am forgiving of others. I’m not always as humble as I should be, yet sometimes I am.
But this isn’t about me.
It’s about emprical evidence of how we came to be what we are. I don’t define science. Science defines science and the scientific method has proven repeatedly to be the best way to understand everything we observe.
Do I think that something which is intrinsically outside the scientific method something which shouldn’t be taught as science?
Sure. That’s a no brainer. The answer is no.
Can it be taught? I guess so, but it shouldn’t be taught as science, just on a hope that someday some scientific evidence will be found to support it. That’s just crazy talk.
“Just because you don’t see things, doesn’t mean they’re not there.”
True, but I don’t see wood elves, either. Do I teach them as science?
Evolution and a Creator are not incompatible concepts. But evolution has tons of evidence and a Creator is based on faith or lack of any other provable test to explain how life began.
If you believe God created Adam and Eve 6,000 years ago in a garden in Iraq, you certainly have a daunting task in explaining all the hominid fossils which we have that date radiometrically to much older date and completely correspond to the evolution theory.
You have to explain away the entire age of the dinosaurs. You have to explain away everything without providing any evidence of anything.
I’m not saying it can’t be done, but it certainly hasn’t been done yet, and wishful thinking is not the same thing as knowledge which we should teach as fact.