Chapman and Behe on C-SPAN re ID

[ananda]

C-SPAN's call-in this morning was on Intelligent Design because nine state legislatures are dealing with this issue.

Michael Behe spent half an hour representing ID, and then Matthew Chapman (Darwin's gggrandson) spent time speaking for science and evolution.

I was so pleased that there was -someone- to represent my views, namely Chapman, and he did so very concisely and intelligently.

Basically, ID should not be taught in the science classroom because it's not really science. It's foundation is a negative, meaning that there is no positive evidence for ID that can be studied or falsified. It's just an idea that the observer, thinking that aspects of life are too complex for science, decides that it must be attributable to an "intelligent designer" and that's the end of that.

What that does is put curiosity and further research and study at a dead end. It also means that this so-called "theory" is simply pulled out of the air and set out there with all kinds of scientific pretension but no substance .. and if taught in the science classroom means that students will spend wasted time on it when they could be learning the science that is real and valuable.

As for me, personally, I do believe in God and Intelligent Design is a great idea to be discussed in philosophy or theology setting. But I think it's completely specious and illogical to say that it's science or belongs in a science classroom. The American education system is enough of a failure as it is. Forcing teachers to teach ID will only further that failure and that will mean that our children and this country will be left behind in the global world and economy.

In BushInc's upsidedown lookingglass world, No Child Left Behind really means No Child Allowed to Think or Succeed in a Thoughtful, Rational Society.

Sue