In Kansas, the state school board is changing the educational standards for its public schoolchildren. As you might have guessed, some "conservative" board members have demanded the biology curriculum include intelligent design. Intelligent design is a philisophical theory that says that life is too complex to have just occured all by itself. If that sounds like creationism, don't be fooled, it isn't! Creationism claimed that God created everything, intelligent design says "gosh, we don't know who created it, but there must have been somebody..."
It is going to be required reading in biology class, right next to the theory of evolution, which is a scientific theory, based on all the available verifiable evidence. Evolution does not claim there is a god, or that there is not a god. It is just our "best guess" as to what is happening in the world based on all the evidence we have gathered, the same way the theory of gravity is our "best guess" based on all the evidence we have.
I can see the headline coming soon - some "conservative scientists" have made a breakthrough discovery! It turns out that gravity is actually God pushing down on everything!
I take issue with philosophy and religion being taught as science. Intelligent design could very easily be taught in a philosophy or religious studies class, along with neo-platonism and stoicism, Rod Parsleyism, etc.
But in the meantime, we have Flying Spaghetti Monsterism. An
unemployed physicist has posted an open letter the the Kansas school bard saying he totally agrees with the decision to teach intelligent design, but since that's included in the science curriculum, his religious views must also be included, and he's going to sue if he has to.
What religious views? The world was created by a flying spaghetti monster. it continues to be manipulated by his noodly appendage. Dressing in full pirate regalia is important to slow global warming. In the beginning, FSM created a mountain, trees, and a midget. Just about as believable as an afterlife open only to those who recite a special formulaic prayer, like "I take jesus christ into my heart and life as my lord and personal savior, and I promise never to be gay or vote for democrats" (if you don't say it just like that, you don't get in.)
Why is evolution such a difficult idea to accept? A relative of mine, who lived in the deep south, subsisting on a diet of Hannity and Limbaugh for the last six years, remarked "There is just no way we are descended from apes." I took some time, explained that the idea wasn't that we had ape grandparents, but we shared a common ancestor, just look at the dog, don't we all have bilateral symmetry, four appendages, five fingers/toes, etc. and look at cousin chimpanzee's face, does it not resemble aunt Betty? - All to no avail. My relative is a nurse, an educated person, so I gave the example of bacteria adapting to an antibiotic. (I thought I had her now)
"But that's a microorganism, it's not the same" - I sensed something behind her vehement denials, something desparate. I recognized it, she was defending her faith.
I began to think about why people have such a problem with the idea, when it seems like something that is easily understood, it explains very well the fossil record and the similarities between all of us creatures here on earth. I thought, asked questions, I listened to the crazies on the radio, and the one thing, the only thing that always was constant, was religion. There is a religious objection to evolution. Apparently, (and this is straight from texas radio- it was a while back but the quote is pretty accurate-) "The
theory of evolution is just that- a theory, propounded by
liberal scientists, and being taught to your children in the classroom. It is illegal in America to worship the savior in school, but satan's lies are being taught to your children every day"
I have to point out that it's just wrong to say that believing scientific evidence is not incompatible with believing in god. It's even possible to be a good christian or muslim, and still believe the evidence before your eyes. This was handled in the middle ages, you know. Read
Aquinas or Averoes - Starting with the premise that your revelation must be true, (bible, koran, whatever) and faced with physical evidence to the contrary, then the revelation that conflicts with the real world must be allegorical to be true.
That means you can't take it literally.
Or you can just do what I do, and stop pretending the "scriptures" have any more value than any other old book. Sure, there's wisdom in them (often the kind you find on bathroom walls), but for those who misunderstand it, they're nothing but trouble.
