| Have you ever read a book by George Orwell entitled | | | | theory or claim, and is thus ineligible to be presented as |
| "1984"? He wrote his pessimistic view of the future in | | | | science. ID is based on some people observing |
| 1948. This is the book that gave us Big Brother, the | | | | complexity in nature and, because they cannot |
| idea of constant surveillance, and a model society | | | | understand what is happening or how it came to be, |
| based on strict conformity. Among the tools developed | | | | believe God must have done it. I haven't a clue how |
| to promote conformity, Orwell's society invented | | | | my car engine works, but I am also pretty sure that |
| Newspeak, where words are redefined to meet the | | | | God did not make it! Imagine what John Paul Jones |
| draconian social order. | | | | would have thought if he could have seen a nuclear |
| In Newspeak we learn that "war is peace," "love is | | | | aircraft carrier... |
| hate," and other definitional reversals that send chills | | | | The few Ph.D. scientists who support the idea are |
| down the spine of anyone who understands the | | | | chemists, engineers, and physicists, not biologists. The |
| implications. The actual 1984 has come and gone, but | | | | few biologists who support the idea are mainly |
| many of Orwell's predictions are with us, especially | | | | biochemists, again with limited experience of whole |
| newspeak. We are no longer fired but downsized, | | | | organism biology. Their take on the complexities of |
| wars produce collateral damage instead of civilian | | | | evolution are as limited as car mechanic's knowledge |
| casualties, and religion is science. | | | | of pharmacy. |
| Did that last one get past you? If not, you may be in a | | | | Real science is the practice of observing and |
| minority, because American school boards have been | | | | explaining nature without resorting to the supernatural. |
| and remain under pressure to insert religious instruction | | | | Just because we don't know how something works |
| into the science curriculum as science. | | | | doesn't mean God did it. In fact, as soon as we credit |
| In recent months the question of how schools should | | | | God (or angels, leprechauns, demons, whatever) with |
| treat the revisionist "Intelligent Design" (ID) doctrine, a | | | | something we have stopped doing science. |
| claim by a very vocal group of extreme | | | | As for the core of the issue, let me--an evolutionary |
| fundamentalist Christians that science classes should | | | | biologist--make one thing perfectly clear: Evolution is a |
| present the Genesis story of the creation of life and its | | | | fact. It is on an absolute par with the orbit and shape |
| diversity on an equal footing with scientific theories. | | | | of the earth, the behavior of electrons to produce |
| The story has been featured in practically every | | | | electricity, and the constancy of the speed of light. To |
| medium available, from the august pages of Science | | | | deny biological evolution is no different than denying |
| magazine to a front-page series in the New York | | | | those other facts--though some people do still believe |
| Times, and everything in between, including Time, | | | | that the earth doesn't move and is flat and the speed |
| Newsweek, American Scholar, Natural History, the | | | | of light is variable. |
| American School Board Journal, and on and on. The | | | | The theory of evolution by means of natural selection |
| quantity, length, and emotional outpouring of the | | | | is a scientific explanation of how (not if) evolution |
| coverage rivals that given to the Abu Ghraib and Swift | | | | happens. The holes in the theory are minor, and deal |
| Boat issues of 2004. Even in religious circles there are | | | | with questions about whether organisms evolve quickly |
| opposite camps, the Archbishop of Vienna supporting | | | | or slowly, in rapid steps or gradual transitions, or |
| the intelligent design doctrine (New York Times, 7 July | | | | whether the host or its parasites is the major force for |
| 2005), while Vatican chief astronomer Father George | | | | change. So far, the theory of evolution is so well |
| Coyne defending Darwinism (The Tablet, 5 August | | | | supported that it has no scientifically valid competition. |
| 2005). Finally, no less a scientific non-expert as | | | | Science teachers should be able to hit ID head on, by |
| President Bush went on record saying he though ID | | | | saying up front "Intelligent Design is one of thousands |
| should be taught in schools. | | | | of religion-based explanations for the origin and |
| The issue of whether or not to teach biblical | | | | diversity of life, but like those others it is not a scientific |
| creationism (under the new name "Intelligent Design") | | | | explanation because..." |
| and to "warn" students that evolutionary theory is a | | | | Alternately, for those who delight in the peripheral |
| weak idea from the fringes of scientific respectability is | | | | issues, perhaps scientists and non-fundamentalists |
| once again in the courts. Pennsylvania's Dover Area | | | | could start demanding that ID/Creationists must subject |
| School District has been sued by eight families who | | | | their beliefs to the scientific method, to provide "equal |
| oppose any passing off of religion as science and | | | | time" in church. Perhaps we should insist upon having a |
| requiring teachers to misrepresent science in their | | | | notice stamped inside Bibles that reads: caution: these |
| classrooms. | | | | accounts represent only a few of several thousand |
| Why doesn't ID deserve equal time as the alternative | | | | religious viewpoints, any of which might be true or all of |
| scientific theory to biological evolution? In simplest | | | | which might be false." It might be interesting to see |
| terms, because ID is not science, nor is it based upon | | | | what real physicists, biologists, and chemists have to |
| science. ID is based on literal interpretation of bible | | | | say about the burning bush, immaculate conception, |
| stories, with no testable hypotheses, no explanation | | | | and transmutation of water into wine. What might we |
| that meets the meaning of "scientific", and no possibility | | | | learn by shedding some light on the parting of the sea, |
| of changing its views in the face of contradictory | | | | walking on water, and the nature of demons? More |
| evidence. In short, Intelligent Design is not a scientific | | | | important, what might we learn about ourselves? |