Thursday, July 20, 2006
Harris's the Name, Misrepresentation's the Game
Liz Craig, a longtime member of Kansas Citizens for Science, who lately has been on the receiving end of a disingenuous smear campaign by intelligent design crank John Calvert, has a letter in today's Kansas City Star that makes an important point.
Craig's writes in response to July 15 letter written by William Harris -- who until he moved to South Dakota played Sgt. Shultz to Calvert's Col. Klink -- complaining that The Star’s editorial July 9 "misrepresented the actions” of the current Kansas Board of Education.
Craig writes:
Harris' should know a misrepresentation when he sees one. After all, he's been the author of many.
Intelligent design crackpots like Harris maintain that science is religion and religion is science. They say, ignoring all the evidence to the contrary, that anyone who opposes teaching ID in public schools is an atheist. They form a group called the Intelligent Design network to write pseudoscience into the curriculum and then claim there's nothing in the standards about ID.
Why sould anyone believe anything they have to say anymore?
Craig's writes in response to July 15 letter written by William Harris -- who until he moved to South Dakota played Sgt. Shultz to Calvert's Col. Klink -- complaining that The Star’s editorial July 9 "misrepresented the actions” of the current Kansas Board of Education.
Craig writes:
Harris also falsely asserts that The Star endorsed “five liberal candidates,” but four are moderate Republicans and one a moderate Democrat. From Harris’ skewed viewpoint, anyone who’s not far right of center is apparently a “liberal.”
Harris' should know a misrepresentation when he sees one. After all, he's been the author of many.
Intelligent design crackpots like Harris maintain that science is religion and religion is science. They say, ignoring all the evidence to the contrary, that anyone who opposes teaching ID in public schools is an atheist. They form a group called the Intelligent Design network to write pseudoscience into the curriculum and then claim there's nothing in the standards about ID.
Why sould anyone believe anything they have to say anymore?
