>Here is what the "National Center for Science Education" likes: > >"Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the >biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in >favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. >Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes >of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution >occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its >occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically >irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited >to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of >our nation's public schools." >
That's all well and good. It starts out from the premise of "We won't consider the possibility of a designer". So this is 'science'. 'Science' that refuses to consider all possible explanations. 'Science' that knowingly looks in one direction but not another. 'Science' that ostracizes and ridicules even it's own learned members if they dare deviate from the scientific dogma promoted by the majority and it's hierarchy (remind you any other historical group?). 'Science' that demeans other ideas and holds that only THEIR own learned clergy must be trusted, and that the laymen is of little worth unless they profess the true faith. Yes, sounds like 'science' to me. I like science personally, just not this kind. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
