To the editor:
The letter by Justin Smitley on Sept. 23, regarding the teaching of evolution is nothing but a bunch of backward thinking. He writes: "They will attempt to thwart any effort at the theory of intelligent design," and then later he writes: "It seems to me like scientists are protecting their belief system." Science is not a belief system; religion is. Science is founded on theories. It also follows that Darwin's theory is a theory, and that in itself is the criticism he has proposed. If there were no criticism about it, then he would be complaining about Darwin's law.
How much sense would it make to put a religious belief such as intelligent design in a science book anyway? That would be like replacing the book of Genesis with Darwin's theory. If anyone thinks it's that important to learn about I.D., then start dragging your kids to church or just tell them about it yourself. Then we can end this pointless debate once and for all and focus on more important things. There's still a war going on, people!
Matt Kuhlman,
Lawrence
Comments
devobrun 11 years, 10 months ago
This debate should stop because neither evolution nor creation is science. Science requires testing. Gathering more evidence is not testing. Historians, lawyers, writers, are but a few of the many intelligent and worthwhile endeavors that benefit from evidence and theory. They are not science. Science requires testing, testing, testing. Stop teaching evolution as science and don't start teaching creation as science either. Stop this debate now by requiring science classes to have a lab. No lab, no science. Stop with the false application of the word science. As a scientist (physics) I am no longer amused by the misapplication of the term science to any rational thought. Stamp collecting is a gathering of stamps and organizing them into categories. Stamp is a fine endeavor. It is not science. For the same reason, EVOLUTION IS NOT A SCIENCE!
ryanjasondesch 11 years, 10 months ago
See, there's this thing called the fossil record and it's testable, it's interpretable under the rules of science. That makes it science. The study of evolution is undertaken by biologists, geologists, etc. SCIENTISTS. That makes it science. Your stamp analogy doesn't hold water because no one has ever tried to say stamp collecting is a science.
yourworstnightmare 11 years, 10 months ago
Again, devobrun, where are you getting this? Did one of your myriad philosophical readings tell you this? Please give me five citations.
You can say all you want that evolution is not science. It is, because it is tested every day using the scientific method. The theory has changed drastically in response to new data. This speaks to the strength of the ideas of mutation and natural selection. They have survived three major revolutions in scientific understanding: genetics, molecular biology, and genome sequencing.
Evolution is science, whether devobrun and his nihilistic philosophical cohort agree.
devobrun 11 years, 10 months ago
The sad state of science is defined by people who call themselves and their work science. The experiments they conduct are intended to prove their theories and therefore not science. I suggest you google Karl Popper to see that the conjecture phase of science is just the start. Testing with the intent to refute the conjecture is what separates science from other scholarly endeavors. Not getting your way? Loosen the rules of science. BS
craigers 11 years, 10 months ago
Maybe ID is backwards thinking. I mean you know what they say hindsight is 20/20 and I think we are all seeing perfectly. The same goes for our thinking, while evolution supporters must have one big pair of beer goggles on.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.