Intelligent design proponents make what sounds like a reasonable request: Why not allow public discussion and debate of alleged flaws in evolution theory?
They charge that evolutionists have clamped down on diverging viewpoints.
This approach sounds reasonable, but it’s not.
What the tiny Intelligent Design Network and its supporters are trying to do is an end-run around the proper arena for their claims — peer-reviewed papers in established scientific journals and other mainstream science forums.
They’ve not successfully made their case in those forums.
Also, there is a false equivalence inherent in the debate format — putting intelligent design proponents side by side with evolution scientists suggests that they have equal credibility in the scientific community.
That’s not remotely accurate.
Why would the state include in its science standards views that aren’t shared by the overwhelming majority of the world’s scientists?
Those who care about good science in our schools should join him in sitting out these spurious hearings.
Sounds about right. Wichita is getting educated on the issue.