Steven_R
Tommy Vercetti Fan Club
- Jul 17, 2013
- 4,852
- 924
- 245
Ten years ago, a federal judge, John Jones, who was brought to GW Bush's attention by Rick Santorum, ruled in the case of Kitzmiller v. Dover BoE that Intelligent Design wasn't science but was just Creationism rebranded. This effectively killed ID as a "science" to be taught in classrooms and had the secondary effect of putting forth to the world just what the arguments for and against ID were.
Here we are a decade later and ID is still with us I'm sorry to say. Of course, they've changed tack some and now use pithy sayings like "Teach the Controversy" when there is no controversy among biologists and even if there were the proper place to have a controversy is among professionals and not in front of ninth graders, but I digress. Or they meander about how many peer-reviewed articles they've published in defense of ID but when one examines the list, almost all of them are in vanity -published sources, creationist science journals, or are said to be ID based when they only tangentially (at best) touch on the material while dealing with another thesis. The forces of deliberate ignorance keeps marching on and they are gaining converts not because it has merit but because it sounds like it has merit. Like all pseudoscience, ID follows the old adage that if you can't wow them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
Still, today is the anniversary of a huge victory in the struggle to keep real science in the classrooms.
So, Merry Kitzmas everyone and to everyone a good night.
Here we are a decade later and ID is still with us I'm sorry to say. Of course, they've changed tack some and now use pithy sayings like "Teach the Controversy" when there is no controversy among biologists and even if there were the proper place to have a controversy is among professionals and not in front of ninth graders, but I digress. Or they meander about how many peer-reviewed articles they've published in defense of ID but when one examines the list, almost all of them are in vanity -published sources, creationist science journals, or are said to be ID based when they only tangentially (at best) touch on the material while dealing with another thesis. The forces of deliberate ignorance keeps marching on and they are gaining converts not because it has merit but because it sounds like it has merit. Like all pseudoscience, ID follows the old adage that if you can't wow them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
Still, today is the anniversary of a huge victory in the struggle to keep real science in the classrooms.
So, Merry Kitzmas everyone and to everyone a good night.
