Evolution is not that important
As I slowly make my way back into blogging after an extended break, it’s nice (and a bit annoying!) to see more prominent bloggers echo arguments I’...
Category: Intelligent Design
Worst. Analogy. Ever
I’m all for activism and outreach, but what does this quote mean: “Teaching science without evolution is like teaching sentence structure without th...
Politicians’ scientific beliefs, indicators, and cultural markers
Liberal bloggers have been attacking National Review’s Kevin Williamson for arguing politicians’ scientific beliefs don’t matter: Why would an...
Belated response to the politics of demarcation
It has been two months (an eternity in blogging years) since Paul Newall and Michael Pearl insisted that the issue of teaching intelligent design in schools sho...
Why do we teach science?
The Lt. makes an important point I’ve been meaning to address in his response to my suggestion that much of biology can be taught without the theory of ev...
Diversity in science and creationism in schools
I’m busy this week preparing for the AAAS Annual Meeting and specifically this panel. I convened this panel to try spark a debate on how we should think a...
The dangers of creationism
To continue with creationism, here’s Michael Pearl: It is one thing to reject Creationism and ID; it is another thing to have good reasons for rejecting C...
Creationists aren’t the same as Holocaust deniers
In a typically eloquent post on trying to understand those whose beliefs we deem abhorrent, Ta-Nehisi Coates takes an unnecessary swipe at creationists: “...
Demarcation happens anyway
It is generally acknowledged that attempts to demarcate science from non- or pseudoscience, based on a priori standards, have failed. —Paul Newall Newall ...
A question of evidence
This is my last post on intelligent design (ID) for a while. But I want to examine the evidentiary claims surrounding the debate. I’m not talking about the ev...