[Harvard] Professor slams intelligent design in Penn. schools

[deadparrot]

HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - A professor on Wednesday slammed the teaching of intelligent design as a blow to science education as he testified in a lawsuit over whether the theory should be introduced in schools as an alternative to evolution.

Teaching intelligent design is "probably the worst thing I have ever heard of in science education," said Brian Alters, who teaches science education at Harvard University and McGill University in Montreal and was called as an expert witness by parents suing the Dover, Pennsylvania, school district.

The federal court trial over teaching theories of human origins in U.S. schools pits Christian conservatives, who say nature is so complex it must have been the work of a God-like creator, against teachers and scientists who back Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

The case, seen as a major test of the issue, has echoes of the famed Scopes Monkey trial of 1925 when lawyers squared off in a Tennessee courthouse over the teaching of Darwin's work.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051012/sc_nm/life_evolution_dc

[drhilarius]

1. "The case...has echoes of the famed Scopes Monkey trial of 1925"

Ahhh, the Christian Conservatives, helping to push us forward to the 19th century. We look like goddamn fools to the rest of the world.

[primavera]

5. Closer to the 15th century, I'd say - n/t

[currents]

2. Science will continue to humiliate religious folks

You have to be blind and stupid to believe religion.

[newyawker99]

9. Hi currents!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[MnFats]

3. the thing about intelligent design that is so ridiculous...

...is that it's even LESS specific than the tradtitional creation story.

it amounts to (and I've actually heard this): it's more complex than we can understand; therefore it must have been made by a supreme omnicient creator-being.)

"what about the eye? how could the eye be the result of evolution? It had to be a creator..."


next they'll demand old-testament style sacrifices of cattle.

[kestrel91316]

4. Why can't people just say "The world and the universe are so

amazingly complex and elegant and beautiful that I PREFER TO THINK OF IT AS DIVINELY CREATED"? And leave it at that? No forcing any philosophical beliefs on others - just one's own private take on the thing.

[mrsadm]

6. I wonder why any science teachers have not thought of this as

an opportunity to teach kids about the rigors of scientific research, the need for proof and for peer reviews, and how "intelligent design" does not follow those scientific practices that have lead to amazing things such as cures for diseases and man going to the moon?

C'mon people, this is an opportunity! :-)

[mediaman007]

7. I thought we taught Intelligent Design in schools already...in mythology!

Just put it in there with Zeus and Hercules.

[Bridget Burke]

8. Even the Greeks had several theories of creation....

Here's the Amazon.com listing for "The Greek Myths" by Robert Graves. You can "page through" the first few chapters, covering the Pelasgian, Homeric/Orphic & Olympian creation stories.
www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0140171991/103-0206775-7168617?v=glance

The next chapter (which you can't read there) covers Two Philosophical Creation myths. Apparently there were "secular humanists" in those days, too. There were Fundamentalists in politics, too; Socrates drank hemlock for interfering with religion.

I wonder if there's even time for teaching mythology in today's schools? Will it help the almighty Test grades? Might it offend folks who don't stand for Paganism--& worry their kids might look at some of the Bible stories as other than literal truth? The Greek (& Roman) tales are essential for understanding later Western literature. And there's a whole world of other myths, useful for understanding history & culture--& fascinating as tales.

[AllegroRondo]

10. Debate at the local Science Center not too long ago

between a Biologist from one of the local Universities, and someone pushing for ID in public schools.

The Biologists opening remarks (paraphrased):
"For today's debate, I'm willing to concede a point. Let us assume today that evolution is completely false. What facts are there to support the theory if Intelligent Design? What experiments or studies have been done to support it?"

The ID supporter seemed stunned. He shuffled his papers, then went into the opening remarks he had prepared, which were many of the arguments against evolution.

The biologists rebuttal: I've already conceded that evolution is wrong. Where are the facts that support your theory?


It was entertaining.

I spoke with the biologist briefly afterwards, mainly to thank him. He said he was upset about being invited to talk. He thought he was being invited to speak about why ID should not be taught in schools, and the debate was billed as "evolution vs. ID". Neat guy, though.