Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Bubble Heads
Rob Crowther of the Discovery Institute has his britches in a bind over a letter to the faculty, staff, and students from Timothy P. White, president of the University of Idaho, that says evolution "is the only curriculum that is appropriate to be taught in our bio-physical sciences."
Crowther writes on the Evolution News and Views blog:
"As an academic scientific community and a research extensive land-grant institution," said Dr. White, "we affirm scientific principles that are testable and anchored in evidence."
That seems rather simple and straightforward to us. Testable and anchored in evidence. That's the standard that guides what is appropriate to teach in UI science classes.
How, we wondered, did Crowther feel he could get away with distorting White's letter so shamelessly? Then we remembered, for one thing, he can be absolutely confident that the clueless denizens who inhabit the Discovery Institute blog will never trouble themselves to read the letter in the original.
Two years ago, President Bush told Brit Hume of Fox News, “I appreciate people’s opinions, but I’m more interested in news,” the president said. “And the best way to get the news is from objective sources, and the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what’s happening in the world.” (The Associated Press, September 22).
That explains how Bush jumped on top of the Hurricane Katrina situation so quickly.
Like President Bush, supporters of intelligent design live in a bubble. They have people like Crowther who tell them what's happening in the world, and he knows he can absolutely count on them to get their news from him, and him alone.
That's why he can get away with saying anything he wants, true or not.
Crowther writes on the Evolution News and Views blog:
Nowhere does the statement say what a differing view on evolution might be. And differing from what exactly? Darwinism? Intelligent design? Structuralism? Self-organization? What is appropriate for UI science classes? Can a professor present research critical of any of these theories or only critical of some? What about evidence that supports these theories can that be discussed with students?Naturally, when Red State Rabble read this, we were outraged at White's blatant violation of academic freedom. In fact, we were so angry, we actually read the letter for ourselves. When we did, we found something a little different that what Crowther advertised:
"As an academic scientific community and a research extensive land-grant institution," said Dr. White, "we affirm scientific principles that are testable and anchored in evidence."
That seems rather simple and straightforward to us. Testable and anchored in evidence. That's the standard that guides what is appropriate to teach in UI science classes.
How, we wondered, did Crowther feel he could get away with distorting White's letter so shamelessly? Then we remembered, for one thing, he can be absolutely confident that the clueless denizens who inhabit the Discovery Institute blog will never trouble themselves to read the letter in the original.
Two years ago, President Bush told Brit Hume of Fox News, “I appreciate people’s opinions, but I’m more interested in news,” the president said. “And the best way to get the news is from objective sources, and the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what’s happening in the world.” (The Associated Press, September 22).
That explains how Bush jumped on top of the Hurricane Katrina situation so quickly.
Like President Bush, supporters of intelligent design live in a bubble. They have people like Crowther who tell them what's happening in the world, and he knows he can absolutely count on them to get their news from him, and him alone.
That's why he can get away with saying anything he wants, true or not.
