Having been rather busy lately I haven't commented yet on Kansas' decision to legislate Intelligent Design into the science classroom. What is there really for a thinking person to say on this subject? I mean, other than "Nice job, morons." Besides, there are many people far more qualified to speak on this subject such as PZ Myers. However, I thought Scientific American Editor In Chief John Rennie pretty well summed up the issue:

It wasn't enough for them to undermine the teaching of biology by falsifying a scientific controversy over evolution. No, the Board of Education went as far as to redefine what science is: it's no longer just a search for natural explanations for natural phenomena. Now it's a search for... well, that's a bit hard to say. Any sort of explanation, apparently. Pixies, ghosts, telekinesis, auras, ancient astronauts, excesses of choleric humor, they all seem to be fair game in the interest of "academic freedom." Oh, and God, of course. The Board might not say that because it could get them into trouble with the Supreme Court, but can anyone say with a straight face that getting God into the science classes isn't the goal of the people who pushed for these changes?

[ ... ]

The state motto of Kansas is Ad astra per aspera: "To the stars through difficulties." But it doesn't sound like Kansas will be going to the stars any time soon, and in this case, the difficulties are of its own making.

John also reminds us that while this is sad, it isn't the end of science. The rest of the world carries on, mostly adhering to a fundamental belief that the scientific method is the best way we have of explaining the natural world and leaving religion to the supernatural world. Science and technology will continue to advance, with or without Kansas and Kansas has made their choice.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

| | | | | | | | | |

tng's blog | printer friendly version