Not So Intelligent Design

By now you should all know that Intelligent Design isn't. You should also know that ID is being shoved down the throats of primary education systems all over the country. You should also know that the President of the United States supports teaching ID in schools on an equal footing to Evolution.

I think I just puked in my mouth.

There is a book floating around called "The Republican War On Science" The book chronicles how the Neo-Cons have tried to use pseudo-science to push their agenda (global warming or stem cell research...anybody been listening?).

My peers and I have been railing about this for years but we have been ignored by the mainstream media. Now that the blinders are off and Journalists are re-establishing the Fourth Estate questions about the Republican agenda are being asked. Now that's something for which you can thank G*d.

Anywho, Intelligent Design is an attempt to get religion taught in schools. It's a two pronged attack. Tear down Darwin and float the idea that the world is too complex to have developed on it's own. Their had to be an 'intelligent designer' behind our universe.

To lower Darwin to their level they try to couch his work as "just" a theory. By definition a theory is unproven. Since his theories are unproven shouldn't their be 'alternative' theories taught side by side so students can learn all sides of the equation? Sounds fair. Until you start to think about it in context.

Sure, Evolution is just a theory. But so is Eugenics. I think that we should teach, on an equal footing to Natural and Divine Selection, Mechanical selection based on our genetic properties...Like skin color.

Eugenics isn't any more ridiculous than ID or a flying spaghetti monster.

Evolution has well over a century of research and evidence to support the theory. All of the scientific work that has been conducted only further reinforces the theory of evolution. There can be no research or proof to ID because it is open-ended. How do you prove the existence of a designer? Do you have his address? How about his mobile number or instant message handle?

To the second prong, ID advocates like to use mechanical metaphors to get their point across. A mousetrap works because of uniquely designed parts. Without each of the parts the trap would not work. And the parts have no function outside of the trap. It sort of makes sense...until you start to think about it in context.

The mousetrap didn't start out fully formed. It was developed over a series of iterations, evolutions if you will. It also is made up of disparate parts that have functions of their own. A spring can be used in a clock for example. The wooden base can be used to prop open a door or as a shim. The metal bar can be used as an underwire in a bra.

If you would like to read more on the problem with teaching ID in schools check out this excellent site.

I find it hard to believe that any rational person could think that teaching Intelligent Design in public schools is a good idea. It's not right to shove religion down someone's throat. And certainly not at taxpayer expense. And certainly shouldn't be advocated by a public official.

I personally believe it shouldn't be taught anywhere but if you are of that persuasion then you go right ahead and study what you want. No matter how ridiculous.

---

Currently I'm listening to Space Spiritual from the album "1968 to 1970 An Axelrod Anthology" by David Axelrod