Written by
in
ious challenge to Darwin’s apostasy.
It’s difficult to know where to begin, except to say that I’m glad I’m not one of his students.
(via Crooked Timber, where Daniel – dsquared? – makes the classic comment that Darwin has “been built up into a scientific demigod mainly for reasons of US politics IMO”.)
I know I’m preaching to the choir, but let me anyway.
“That IDT is more than an American quirk is suggested by the resurgence of Christian and Muslim fundamentalism worldwide.” I can’t imagine using Muslim (or even Christian) fundamentalism as a way of propping up your position.
“Darwin is more readily embraced than Newton as a scientific icon…” When did that happen? But the statement makes me think of a truly disturbing web-site (can’t find it right now) I came across that takes Newton’s religious writings seriously.
“Newton’s life teaches that the Bible can provide a sure path to great science.” Newton’s religious writings are nonsense. Like his politics, the religious writings are interesting to the Newton-phile only because they are so completely out of character.
BTW, is there anything like ID in England? To show you what it is like in the US, here is a statement from a local small-circulation newspaper, in response to the Dover case: “Maybe your ancestors were monkeys, but mine weren’t”. Would you ever find that in England?
Dom
I doubt you’d find a comment like that in any local newspaper, however small the circulation. Maybe in some fringe publication though – I don’t know.
I read yesterday somewhere that advocates of intelligent design intend to ignore the Dover ruling (which applies apparently only to Dover and surroundings) and keep pushing for their ‘theory’ in the rest of the country. These people are so commited they can only be true believers (in their cause, of course).
Leave a Reply