This is a cute story that I meant to blog about earlier but forgot about. Anyway, it's about how biologists are reluctant to engage in debate with creationists/intelligent design theorists because they always end up looking bad.
How, you ask. It seems the C/ID folks bring in all sorts of unanswerable points. You really have to listen to it. The guy who's become the go-to guy for biologists on this side of the debate said when he was first asked to do it he called up Stephen J. Gould for help and Gould wound't touch it with a barge pole.
All of which leads me to the question: This whole evolution v. creation thing is relatively new, no? I mean, of course I know about the Scopes Monkey trial thing, but by the time I was in high school that seemed to have been settled. I took biology and Darwin's theory was generally accepted. I never learned a thing about creationism in high school and as far as I know, no one was lobbying the school board to teach creationism or label evolution as just a theory. (Not that I paid too much attention to such things in high school.)
Then about what, 10 years ago? 15? Parents began storming the schools about this new-fangled evolution thing and it's been a running theme ever since. Am I right? I don't know. Do I feel this way because of my blue state upbringing? Was this going on in the red states at the time and I wasn't paying attention?
As a matter of fact, I spent my last year of high school in Florida (Is it blue or red?), but because I had already fulfilled my science requirements, I didn't take any science courses then. In fact, the only required course I had was something called "Americanism v. Communism." Oh, and gym. In fact, in my last month of high school I took nothing but gym. Seriously. Since I had taken advanced courses before I arrived, and I had passed "Americanism v. Communism," gym was the only obstacle to graduating a year early. Never was I so devoted to physical fitness.
No comments:
Post a Comment