September 4, 2005


The battle has long raged between science and religion to explain the origin of mankind. Now there’s a growing move to put God back in the driving seat. Guess which side George Bush is on? (Torcuil Crichton, 9/04/05, Sunday Herald)

There is no research to back ID theory, no peer-reviewed scientific journals, no positive evidence; just holes picked in the deficiences of evolution, which all admit are manifold. [...]

The “let them discuss it” argument deployed by President Bush is seen as another Trojan horse, a way of getting creationism into schools under the cover of science.

“I think part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,” Bush said recently. “You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas. The answer is yes.” In Richard Dawkins’s view, the “teach both sides” argument sounds reasonable until you realise there are no “two sides”. Evolution is science and riven with academic controversy, he says, while intelligent design is bunkum.

The debate over intelligent design is not about two views of science; it’s about two ideologies of where we came from. In education, as in life, this has profound implications . These are big questions which all too often we avoid grappling with.

Opponents of intelligent design brand its supporters as back-door creationists, and creationists themselves ask the same question of the movement. The obvious question raised by the argument for intelligent design is: who is the designer?

For the moment, the movement artfully dodges the question of the maker’s identity. But eventually, the designer will have to be subjected to scientific scrutiny. Otherwise, the whole intelligent-design-as-science movement will continue to be dismissed as a wedge whose purpose is to crack open US public schools to fund amentalist Christian religious teaching.

Mr. Crichton nearly has an insight here--Darwinism isn't dying because I.D. is better science but because Darwinism itself can't clear the scientific bar.

Posted by Orrin Judd at September 4, 2005 6:44 AM

It just seems that the whole issue of Intelligent Design is very badly reported. Reading this article, I wonder if Mr. Crichton has taken any time to inform himself about it. But, what else is new?

Posted by: L. Rogers at September 4, 2005 10:52 PM