From the Greek sophos, wise, and mros, stupid, a Sophomore is, literally, an educated moron.
How else could you explain a man who has a degree from Harvard Medical School, one of the nations pre-eminent heart surgeons, who has risen to a position of power and leadership in one of the most esteemed lawmaking bodies of the world, opening his piehole and spewing such lunacy as this? "[Intelligent Design]doesn't force any particular theory on anyone. I think in a pluralistic society that is the fairest way to go about education and training people for the future."
Okay, I've commented about this in several blogs, so this may sound old to some of you. You can't teach Intelligent Design as a valid scientific theory because IT'S NOT A SCIENTIFIC THEORY!
Let's make this real simple. A basic element of a valid scientific theory is something called falsifiability. In other words, for it to be right, you have to be able to prove it wrong. If you can't prove it wrong, it becomes a valid scientific theory.
How do you disprove the existence of an intelligent designer? The same way you prove the existence:
You don't. Because you can't. You can't prove or disprove the supernatural. Because once it's proven, it stops being supernatural, and becomes natural.
If you can't prove something wrong, it is not a scientific theory.
Here's a theory: When cows are introduced to zero gravity, they become sentient, and in fact become supergeniuses in the field of calculus.
That theory has more scientific viability than Intelligent Design, because this could be disproved.
And that's the beauty of scientific theories: they can be proven wrong. After which, scientists ask themselves: 'Well, if that's wrong, what else could explain this?" And on it goes, refining, sometimes retracting, modifying, moving forward, being argued over at each point. It is our best guess, so far, about the structure of life in the natural world.
Intelligent design, however, supposes a supernatural beginning, in other words: attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.
How can you explain a natural occurrence with a supernatural 'theory' and call it scientific?
So, what we have heere is a man well-versed in the world of science, who should know about what is and is not a valid scientific theory, coming out and saying something like that?
The man has to be a moron.
Or, alternately, running for President on the Republican ticket, because this is just the sort of thing a potential candidate would say to please and placate the conservative evangelicals who control the party right now.
Especially after he broke ranks and supported stem-cell research. Which almost had me admiring him.
But not now.
So, take this little bit of bullshit, and mix it in with the Terri Schaivo instant replay diagnosis, and what do you come up with?
Well, I don't know what you will come up with but me--I see it as one of two things:
- He really is stupid, in which case he shouldn't be elected president;
- The man is willing to lie just to get to the White House, which makes you wonder what he'll do when he gets there, which means he shouldn't be elected president.
And for those of you who might ask 'So what? Why is this so important?' I offer the following:
Most of high-school science is wasted on most of the students. Let's face it: most of us don't need to know anything about osmoregulation in our daily lives. There are some, however, who thrive in the field, and we call them boring at parties.
What high-school science teaches everyone, however, is the scientific approach. It teaches us that, no, we don't know the answers to everything. But here's our best guesses. It teaches us how to think rationally about stuff.
Introducing Intelligent Design into this system removes the need for thought by the students.
Why would conservative evangelicals want to prevent our kids from thinking?
Why would a man of science like Dr. William Frist go along with this?
One last thing: I'm a very spiritual man. God is a very big presence in my life. I have no problem with people of faith expressing their beliefs. I do have a problem with people of faith trying to foist their beliefs onto other people. This is another attempt at that.