Saturday, September 03, 2005
ID: Creationist PR Strategy
The Washington Post has printed a letter to the editor, in its "Free For All" section by Red State Rabble reader Neil McNamara, of Vienna, Virginia (a Washington D.C. suburb) in reply to an article written by Washington Post sports columnist Sally Jenkins. Ms. Jenkins wrote, in part:
Here's what Neil had to say:
Sally Jenkins's column contained factual errors. One of the most important appears early, when she says: "First, let's get rid of the idea that ID (intelligent design) is a form of sly creationism. It isn't." Yes, it is.
Jerry Coyne of the University of Chicago has published an excellent history of the creationist movement, from the Scopes trial to the present day, in the New Republic. It shows how creationism has "evolved" in response to decades of First Amendment challenges in the courts.
Further, the "wedge" strategy prepared by the leading proponent of intelligent design, the Discovery Institute, lays out its five-year plan to "replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God." It reveals that intelligent design is nothing but a PR strategy to get the group's version of Christian creationism into public schools. There is little mention of science in the plan, because proponents have no actual theory; they have no testable hypotheses; they have performed no experiments. They are waging a social and political battle because they have no science to put forward.
"First, let's get rid of the idea that ID (intelligent design) is a form of sly creationism. It isn't. ID is unfairly confused with the movement to teach creationism in public schools. The most serious ID proponents are complexity theorists, legitimate scientists among them... "
Here's what Neil had to say:
Sally Jenkins's column contained factual errors. One of the most important appears early, when she says: "First, let's get rid of the idea that ID (intelligent design) is a form of sly creationism. It isn't." Yes, it is.
Jerry Coyne of the University of Chicago has published an excellent history of the creationist movement, from the Scopes trial to the present day, in the New Republic. It shows how creationism has "evolved" in response to decades of First Amendment challenges in the courts.
Further, the "wedge" strategy prepared by the leading proponent of intelligent design, the Discovery Institute, lays out its five-year plan to "replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God." It reveals that intelligent design is nothing but a PR strategy to get the group's version of Christian creationism into public schools. There is little mention of science in the plan, because proponents have no actual theory; they have no testable hypotheses; they have performed no experiments. They are waging a social and political battle because they have no science to put forward.
