The Text of the Lehigh Statement
While I’d seen a statement in the past attesting to the fact that the Lehigh biology department has distanced itself from Michael Behe’s Intelligent Design position I hadn’t seen the text of the statement.
The statement was reported in the Morning Call as:
''While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific.''
Again, the point being that the scientific community is, at least for the moment, unimpressed and considers Behe’s ideas poor science. Now why would a rural school board pay attention to “poor science” if it didn’t line up with a religious agenda?
In the meantime, Channel 8 in Harrisburg has reported, “Behe said major scientific organizations and even his own colleagues have rejected intelligent design. But he said their objections aren't supported by scientific evidence.”
Well here we go with the “argument from arrogance” again. Only Behe understands the evidence. Everyone else, EVERYONE ELSE, is wrong. Tell me Mike, are you so sure because God told you so? Nah, erase that last statement, it wasn’t really a fair thing to say. Apparently Behe honestly believes in his “science.” But then again didn’t Pons and Fleischmann honestly believe that they had come up with a way to perform cold fusion? Should we be teaching high school physics students about their “fusion percolator?”
I don’t know how this judge is going to rule as the intricacies of the law is beyond my area of knowledge, but it seems pretty clear to me that the decision by the board could only have been driven by a religious agenda. There is no credible debate over the accuracy of evolution in the scientific community.
The only controversy that exists is between evolution and some religions. High School science classrooms are not the proper place to debate that controversy. Before one can consider both sides, one needs to know both sides! Students are told the religious side by parents and church from an early age. How about we give them the scientific perspective and THEN let them sort it all out.
The criticism about evolution being taught as a fact is, to be honest, rather nonsensical because according to science, IT IS A FACT! Just like 6 days of creation is considered a fact other places.
If there is truly a desire to teach critical thinking skills, then why not simply introduce instruction about the Scientific Method and how it applies to ALL sciences. I would think that teaching that all scientific theories, including evolution, are tentative would thrill them to no end.
The statement was reported in the Morning Call as:
''While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific.''
Again, the point being that the scientific community is, at least for the moment, unimpressed and considers Behe’s ideas poor science. Now why would a rural school board pay attention to “poor science” if it didn’t line up with a religious agenda?
In the meantime, Channel 8 in Harrisburg has reported, “Behe said major scientific organizations and even his own colleagues have rejected intelligent design. But he said their objections aren't supported by scientific evidence.”
Well here we go with the “argument from arrogance” again. Only Behe understands the evidence. Everyone else, EVERYONE ELSE, is wrong. Tell me Mike, are you so sure because God told you so? Nah, erase that last statement, it wasn’t really a fair thing to say. Apparently Behe honestly believes in his “science.” But then again didn’t Pons and Fleischmann honestly believe that they had come up with a way to perform cold fusion? Should we be teaching high school physics students about their “fusion percolator?”
I don’t know how this judge is going to rule as the intricacies of the law is beyond my area of knowledge, but it seems pretty clear to me that the decision by the board could only have been driven by a religious agenda. There is no credible debate over the accuracy of evolution in the scientific community.
The only controversy that exists is between evolution and some religions. High School science classrooms are not the proper place to debate that controversy. Before one can consider both sides, one needs to know both sides! Students are told the religious side by parents and church from an early age. How about we give them the scientific perspective and THEN let them sort it all out.
The criticism about evolution being taught as a fact is, to be honest, rather nonsensical because according to science, IT IS A FACT! Just like 6 days of creation is considered a fact other places.
If there is truly a desire to teach critical thinking skills, then why not simply introduce instruction about the Scientific Method and how it applies to ALL sciences. I would think that teaching that all scientific theories, including evolution, are tentative would thrill them to no end.
posted by Alencon at 10:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home