There is a poll on the home page of “The Lariat”, Baylor’s on line newspaper. It asks if Baylor should encourage, discourage, prohibit, or support Intelligent Design. The Creationists are winning by a landslide.The poll is here just in case you are interested in voting.[hat tip Pharyngula]Oh, and by the way … I went over to Pharyngula to see what PZ’s readers were saying about the poll, and I get the impression that many of them are voting to Encourage the research. Holy crap, I thought they were a smarter lot. I’m sure the readers of my blog will know what to do. Right?
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
Heh, it’s a rigged question. It asks whether Baylor should encourage Intelligent Design research. Well of course they should! But I doubt Baylor will have any success in getting ID’ers to do actual research.
“I’m sure the readers of my blog will know what to do.”My plan: sit in the comfy chair, pop a beer, and enjoy the fireworks.
Professor: Are you sure? One’s immediate reaction is to “encourage research…” but that is not necessarily the best idea.Imagine Acme College of Natural History. Limited resources, desire to produce good research, etc. Now, imagine this poll on Acme Nat’s web site:Acme College of Natural History should:Expend resources on research on bigfootNot expend resources on research on bigfootWhich is the “correct” answer?You are absolutely right, it is a rigged question, but I think there is a flaw in the rigging.Obviously, the readers of this site are above average.
It’s logical that we should vote “yes” to encourage research.One problem is interpretation of “research” – the ID people will claim their prejudiced claims and propaganda is research.But there is research which tests claims of ID, like irreducible complexity, and finds it doesn’t stand up. This is the research which is genuine because it is the normal scientific testing.The overwhelming support for yes results form people supporting honest research, as well as the ID supporters who just see this as another campaign to show support for ID.
But the problem is more fundamental (pardon the pun) They can’t do research, no one can do research on this. The whole question is not set up to do research or to be subjected to rational or scientific scrutiny.