1. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #160679 by sschaller on April 14, 2008 at 9:17 am

While the current battle resembles the proverbial "cat fight," the issue was, at one time, about open discussion. The issue is not whether one idea has scientific merit - and therefore should be included. The issue is - let us openly discuss ideas to see if they have scientific merit.

Dr. Dawkins asserts that Evolution has been definitively proven, yet many prominent Evolutionists disagree on key points, or do not yet have tenable answers for fundamental questions.

Intelligent design proponents suggest they can bring scientifically supportable theories to the table that address these questions.

The Scientific community has two options:
1. Silence Opponents -
Shut out all debate on the subject, just as Galileo was silenced when suggesting radically different ideas to the standard accepted theories.
2. Discuss the Evidence -
Tell Intelligent Design proponents to "Prove It." If they have anything legitimately scientific to offer, the scientific community would benefit. If not, they will simply dig their own graves. They will not even have the benefit of whining that they are not allowed at the table.

Simply put, the only reason to prevent the ID proponents from bringing their evidence is that we would be afraid of what they have to say. Fearing the challenge to our ideas is explicitly counter-scientific. The whole point of science is to challenge currently accepted ideas by reviewing the best-available evidence carefully and methodically.

When we refuse to allow credentialed scientists at the table because we believe in a flat earth, we risk becoming scientific dinosaurs because the facts will eventually come out, and we will be left behind.

Let's see what they have, and let the facts speak for themselves.