Re: [Phys-l] Intelligent designists fight back.

["John Clement" <clement@hal-pc.org>]

All too true.  The big connection is that the conservatives saw the way to
win was to embrace the fundamentalists.  It is a marriage made in votes.
The older conservatives such as Eisenhower, Goldwater... would not have
espoused the anti-science, pro-theocracy positions.

The fundamentalists saw the way to gain political power was through the
Republicans.  But, they do no see that that is also the way to lose
influence if the Republicans lose.  In the end they will have more influence
if they stick to their message, and keep away from endorsing specific
politicians.  If a strong Democratic majority comes in, a number of
religious organizations that campaigned for Republicans may lose their tax
exemptions.

There is some interesting research that shows how even educated people can
jump on bandwagons with inadequate evidence.  This was reported in a fairly
recent NY Times article.  Global warming is certainly a contentious issue,
but it should be clear that increasing the carbon load in the atmosphere is
probably not a wise thing to do.  It is also obvious that our society is not
sustainable in the long run because we are consuming non-renewable finite
resources.  The level of urgency is certainly debatable.  Actually the
predictions of the end of oil are actually coming true.  These predictions
were made during the SUV boom, and one would think that the auto makers
would have looked at the demographic trends and made ready for the bust.
Now that would have been intelligent design!

In either case it is clear that we have failed as educators when so many are
ignorant of the basic ideas behind science.  Without an educated intelligent
public it may not be possible to solve the impending problems.  In this
respect both Europe, and the far East are ahead of us.  So ID is a big issue
for the entire scientific community.  Students need to understand that it is
not and can not be science.

Ben Stein claims that reputable scientists have been censored and forced to
shut up because they espoused ID.  In reality the history of science has
been one where the majority has always tended to suppress the minority point
of view.  But this is a case where no reputable science journal should
publish pro ID articles.  However, ID articles should be perfectly
acceptable in religion journals, or perhaps philosophy journals.  The appeal
to fairness is a smoke screen.  Schools would not allow flat earthers to
include their point of view.  At present there is tremendous pressure
brought against teachers who mention evolution in fundamentalist
communities.  Evolution teaching in many schools is now de facto censored.
Ben Stein does not mention this.  Now if ID is presented in schools, why not
Wiccan philosophy, or Hindu cosmology...

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

> One wonders the connection between conservative politics and intelligent
> design. Ditto Global warming,  and tobacco use is related to cancer
> deniers. (
> Yes many of the same Characters, it's really true)