State Science Curriculum Director Resigns

This Intelligent Design business never ends, and well, it won't will it? There are plenty of gods to go around. This is an intriguing case out of Texas. I've been keeping this post on draft mode, not sure why, so here it goes:

Apparently the State science curriculum director resigned, after being reprimanded and put on leave for forwarding an email... about Barbara Forrest delivering a talk! Was it one of those great emails that says, "this is it! let us get them, and Oh, here's a picture of the pope naked..." Nope! (Although I hope to get one of those someday!) Her contribution to the email was merely to forward it with "FYI" on it:

Comer was put on 30 days paid administrative leave shortly after she forwarded an e-mail in late October announcing a presentation being given by Barbara Forrest, author of "Inside Creationism's Trojan Horse," a book that says creationist politics are behind the movement to get intelligent design theory taught in public schools. Forrest was also a key witness in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case concerning the introduction of intelligent design in a Pennsylvania school district. Comer sent the e-mail to several individuals and a few online communities, saying, "FYI."

The folks that employed Comer have said that the leave was due to more than just the email. I don't buy it. Read the rest of the article.

I know I have harped plenty here about Intelligent Design, but it still strikes me that so many folks don't get (well, don't want to get more like it!) the general relationship and answer that it seeks to hide behind: a scientific explanation not immediately available must mean a supernatural one must be had! They call it science, and call it a theory, and then argue politically for its inclusion in the science curriculum. Yikes! Intelligent Design, boldly seeking non-scientific, supernatural explanations an presenting them as if they were good science. Intelligent Design is not even good religious literacy.

Comments

[Amadeus]

"Intelligent Design" or Creationism as it is has no place in a science curriculum. NOVA recently ran an expose and made a clear case why "Intelligent Design" is not science nor an alternative to the Theory of Evolution--which is grounded in scientific fact--or to be pointed adheres to the Scientific Method. You can catch it here if you didn't see it: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

I happen to like this summary I read a while back:

There are tests that can determine whether or not the theory is correct as it stands, and these tests can be made. Thousands of such tests have been made, and the current theories have passed them all. Also, scientists are willing to alter the theories as soon as new evidence is discovered. This allows the theories to become more and more accurate as research progresses.

Most religions, on the other hand, are based on revelations, that usually cannot be objectively verified. They talk about the why, not the how. Also, religious beliefs are not subject to change as easily as scientific beliefs. Finally, a religion normally claims an exact accuracy, something which scientists know they may never achieve.

Some people build up religious beliefs around scientific principles, but then it is their beliefs which are the religion. This no more makes scientific knowledge a religion than painting a brick makes it a bar of gold."

If you haven't already, do look over The Wedge document (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/2437/wedge.html) from the Discovery Institute. Their agenda is so much more than just getting ID into schools as an alternative theory. These people are dangerous, a threat to civilization, scientific advancement and study.

Peace and Joy to You!

~Amadeus

[Nacho]

You are absolutely right Amadeus! I do like the Wedge stuff, as well as Barbara Forrest's book.

Good to hear/read you again!