Bergen Record Tells It Like It Is
Well at least the Bergen Record stood up and addressed the Intelligent Design vs Evolution question yesterday in it's typical no nonsense fashion.
My only problem with the editorial is that the record makes the same mistake that Time Magazine made. Evolution DOES NOT teach that men descended from apes but rather that both men and apes descended form a common ancestor. If they want to call their great-great-greatx1000 grandpa an ape, that's up to them. I prefer to think of him as a prototype man.
It's not science
Sunday, August 28, 2005
EXTRA, EXTRA! Man is descended from apes.
Evolution should be old and accepted news by now, but unfortunately, it isn't. First, President Bush and now, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist want something else taught in science class besides Darwin - intelligent design.
Intelligent design is not science; it's not even a theory. It's just a sneaky way to get religion into the classroom by "teaching the controversy" that evolution can't explain all of life's complexities. There must be an intelligent designer behind it all - in other words, God.
But there is no controversy to teach. Evolution can't explain all of life's complexities because it's still ... evolving. Sure, there are gaps and questions still to be answered.
However, overwhelming evidence points to a system over eons of random mutation and natural selection. And evolution remains the bedrock of modern science. It is "the central unifying concept of biology," according to the National Academy of Sciences.
That's not to say there isn't a creator. Many scientists of various religions believe there is. But they know it can't be proven by scientific methods. It's a question of faith. Evolution is not evidence of a godless universe. It's just that science cannot prove the existence - or non-existence - of God.
Even top proponents of intelligent design admit their "theory" can't be proven by any experiment. Their real goal is to undermine evolution because it goes against the story of creation in the Book of Genesis.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Frist - who is a Harvard-educated doctor and should know better - aren't helping America's students by pushing intelligent design. There are enough problems with the teaching of science without adding this non-science to the mix.
America needs more science teachers in the nation's public schools and more rigorous science education. Student achievement in science is higher in other countries, and more science doctorates are awarded in Europe and Asia. Foreign scientists come here to fill U.S. jobs. These are issues our leaders should be addressing by beefing up science classes, not watering them down.
Science must not be limited by ideology. That's medieval.
Much more is yet to be discovered about how life began and became more complex: Witness the exciting new "Origins of Life in the Universe Initiative" at Harvard, which will bring together leading scientists in biology, chemistry, astronomy, physics, astrobiology and astrophysics to study how life came into existence after the Big Bang and whether life might exist on other planets.
Obviously, we should be going forward, not backward, in the advancement of science.
My only problem with the editorial is that the record makes the same mistake that Time Magazine made. Evolution DOES NOT teach that men descended from apes but rather that both men and apes descended form a common ancestor. If they want to call their great-great-greatx1000 grandpa an ape, that's up to them. I prefer to think of him as a prototype man.
It's not science
Sunday, August 28, 2005
EXTRA, EXTRA! Man is descended from apes.
Evolution should be old and accepted news by now, but unfortunately, it isn't. First, President Bush and now, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist want something else taught in science class besides Darwin - intelligent design.
Intelligent design is not science; it's not even a theory. It's just a sneaky way to get religion into the classroom by "teaching the controversy" that evolution can't explain all of life's complexities. There must be an intelligent designer behind it all - in other words, God.
But there is no controversy to teach. Evolution can't explain all of life's complexities because it's still ... evolving. Sure, there are gaps and questions still to be answered.
However, overwhelming evidence points to a system over eons of random mutation and natural selection. And evolution remains the bedrock of modern science. It is "the central unifying concept of biology," according to the National Academy of Sciences.
That's not to say there isn't a creator. Many scientists of various religions believe there is. But they know it can't be proven by scientific methods. It's a question of faith. Evolution is not evidence of a godless universe. It's just that science cannot prove the existence - or non-existence - of God.
Even top proponents of intelligent design admit their "theory" can't be proven by any experiment. Their real goal is to undermine evolution because it goes against the story of creation in the Book of Genesis.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Frist - who is a Harvard-educated doctor and should know better - aren't helping America's students by pushing intelligent design. There are enough problems with the teaching of science without adding this non-science to the mix.
America needs more science teachers in the nation's public schools and more rigorous science education. Student achievement in science is higher in other countries, and more science doctorates are awarded in Europe and Asia. Foreign scientists come here to fill U.S. jobs. These are issues our leaders should be addressing by beefing up science classes, not watering them down.
Science must not be limited by ideology. That's medieval.
Much more is yet to be discovered about how life began and became more complex: Witness the exciting new "Origins of Life in the Universe Initiative" at Harvard, which will bring together leading scientists in biology, chemistry, astronomy, physics, astrobiology and astrophysics to study how life came into existence after the Big Bang and whether life might exist on other planets.
Obviously, we should be going forward, not backward, in the advancement of science.
posted by Alencon at 10:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home