Discovery Institute is So Wrong

Science writer Carl Zimmer has been having a back-and-forth with the Discovery Institute — the main group advocating inserting “intelligent design”/creationism into public school science classes.

As Zimmer illustrates by proving each of the Discovery Institute’s employees’ arguments incorrect, one could easily conclude that DI’s support of teaching students pseudo-science is based on the simple fact that they don’t understand basic science.

Watch for Discovery Institute folks pushing “intelligent design”/creationism (likely under the guise of teaching “strengths and weaknesses”) during this year’s State Board of Education review of science textbooks.

One thought on “Discovery Institute is So Wrong

  1. I agree totally with this post. I’d like to share my take on ID, which was printed in the Fort Worth (Texas) Star-Telegram recently:
    After reading and hearing the proponents of Intelligent Design go on over and over about the “logic” of their belief I thought I might used their same line of reasoning and put forth my own proposal. According to the line of reasoning demonstrated by the Intelligent Design people I will disregard and ignore the mountains of evidence and proof put forth by the various sciences except where it suits my needs. While fixating on minor unresolved details, such as how the Neanderthals died off, as flaws in the theory of Evolution and science in general. And then I will fall back their favorite; “you can’t prove me wrong, so I have to be right,” which is an attempt to ignore the requirement of testable evidence that is the basis of science.
    Using the line of reasoning used by the Creationists I now conclude that humans, and really everything else, are too complex to be explained, especially if we avoid any empirical evidence and proof. Therefore I, and I’m sure any sane deep thinker will agree because it is so obvious when you think deeply about it, conclude that we are in truth and fact Blueberry muffins dreaming that we are humans, and everything else is part of that dream.
    Now that I’ve shown the world the truth, and I have demonstrated that I am using the same line of reasoning as the Creationists, if Intelligent Design is allowed in science texts the Blueberry Muffin Truth must go in those text books too.
    It should also be understood that in accordance with the ID system of reasoning you are not allowed to ask who baked us muffins, or who made the maker. It is also clear that just like the Creationist my wondrous knowledge is in no way responsible for the deterioration of education or knowledge, or America loosing its edge in any and all areas of science, technology, medicine, etc. Now I wonder how long it will be before I am awarded my Nobel Prize for my ground breaking epiphany, does anyone know if they deliver?

    Allan Vrasich