| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
attitudes, and countries which do not have these attitudes can inherit
the mantle of having superior science and technology. Is this
Lysenkoism all over again with us on the wrong side?
As I mentioned before, ID proponents will point to the awesome
complexity of nature as evidence *for* ID and I strongly suspect
that
the vast majority of those who haven't made up their minds will find
that a compelling argument. So again I would implore us to stick to
opposed to evolution, but rather provides a prime cause, while
evolution provides the physical details.
Essentially all religious people who accept evolution would probably
espouse this form of ID. The fundamentalists are in the end making a
fatal mistake by hitching their theology to a particular model of
physical reality. The RC church was burned by this type of
controversy over Galileo, but eventually they came around. Of course
the thinking Protestants and most thinking Catholics agreed with him.
Unfortunately our country can be burned by the anti-scientific
attitudes, and countries which do not have these attitudes can inherit
the mantle of having superior science and technology. Is this
Lysenkoism all over again with us on the wrong side?
Incidentally teachers and administrators routinely do the same thing.
They accept propositions like technology improves education, without
having any evidence. After all everyone knows this is true! The
lecture system works well. Demonstrations help students understand.
I have seen supposedly intelligent people accept the work of a
salesman without asking for evidence that a particular expensive
technology will improve student learning. I was criticized when I
said there is not any evidence for this. They confused belief with
evidence.
John M. Clement
Houston, TX