Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Darwinism: The Evolution of Intolerance

*”I lost my job at George Mason University for teaching the problems with evolution. Lots of scientists question evolution, but they would lose their jobs if they spoke out.”- Caroline Crocker, as quoted in the Washington Post, February 5, 2006.

*”The only appropriate response should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing of some teachers, many school-board members, and vast numbers of sleazy far-right politicians…It’s time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots.”- Paul Z. Myers, University of Minnesota professor, in a typically tolerant, reasoned rant… that clearly isn’t ‘hate speech!’

                When a teacher or public school decides to inform students that Darwinism is a theory, not a proven fact, and opts to, say, teach both evolution and creationism, Darwinists become apoplectic and usually manage to have the decision declared unconstitutional.
                Courts have ruled that teaching intelligent design in public school classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States because, “intelligent design is not science” and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.” First off, teaching the theory of intelligent design does not establish a religion. Preventing that theory  from being taught does, however, by definition, prevent the free exercise of “religion” and abridges freedom of speech. Secondly, if intelligent design is untrue and impossible simply because it is not “science,” that leaves us in a bit of a lurch. “Science” did not create the universe, itself, or anything else.

                Evolution does not explain creation. By definition, it is simply a theory about what came after.

                Why should this extreme hatred and intolerance of any skepticism or questioning of the theory of evolution have come about? After all, this is supposedly science we’re talking about. Those are vital aspects of the vaunted scientific method itself.
                 Perhaps it has ‘evolved’ as the best way to foster and preserve the Darwinists power and esteem.
                ”Molecular machines display a key signature or hallmark of design, namely, irreducible complexity. In all irreducibly complex systems in which the cause of the system is known by experience or observation, intelligent design or engineering played a role in the origin of the system…We find such systems within living organisms.”- Scott A. Minnich and Stephen C. Meyer, Second International Conference on Design & Nature, 2004.

No comments:

Post a Comment