Comments on: Baylor University and Intelligent Design

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:08:59 +0000

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.

By: Ken

Ken — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:10:39 +0000

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.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 09:39:48 +0000

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.

By: Lassi Hippeläinen

Lassi Hippeläinen — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:54:22 +0000

“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.

By: The Professor

The Professor — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 07:51:19 +0000

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.