An excellent commentary by one of my favorite authors on the Pandora’s Box that (not so) Intelligent Designers introduced via their primary argument, that alternatives to Evolution deserve equal time. They sidestep the entire question of appropriateness and appeal to people’s sense of fairness – without really believing in even that principle themselves since they fail to introduce non-Judeo Christian creations stories, or creation variants that don’t require a single divine entity.
Originally posted on CONTRARY BRIN:
Part of a series of re-issues of my most-popular online postings. This one about the deep illogic underlying the claims by the fundamentalist community that they “just want students to be exposed to all sides and make up their own minds.”
THERE IS RICH IRONY in how the present battle over Creationism v. Darwinism has taken shape, and especially how this round differs from previous episodes. A clue to both the recent success — and the inevitable collapse — of “Intelligent Design” can be found in its name, and in the new tactics that are being used to support its incorporation into school curricula. In what must be taken as sincere flattery, these tactics appear to acknowledge just how deeply the inner lessons of science have pervaded modern culture.
Intelligent Design (ID) pays tribute to its rival, by demanding to be recognized as a direct and “scientific” competitor with the Theory of Evolution…
View original 2,228 more words