It would seem according to this report [1] that University and College presence of Intelligent Design is on its deathbed. Perhaps this is premature, but if true it would signal that the basic inability of ID to support its own conclusions are now becoming evident to all but the thoroughly committed.
Am I glad about this?
I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, it certainly gives me some hope that people are not as gullible as they often appear. On the other, ID was a good example of comparison for science courses which usually only have long-dead examples of bad science with which to establish baselines for classroom examples on how science, properly applied, ousts erroneous lines of inquiry.
Those who truly believe ID is a viable model will see this as a triumph of cliques and clades, the “political” marginalization of an idea that challenges tenure, sinecure, and authority. It won’t occur to them that ID just can’t compete because it is not good science. Or if it does occur to them, they will dismiss it because the central notion behind it is something they hold a priori as absolute and anything that might threaten it is to be attacked and anything, no matter how ambiguous, erroneous, or boneheaded, that supports it must be defended.
Now how is that supposed to be scientific?
(By the way, when you read the post linked to, it is interesting to read the comments to the end.)
Print this post [2]
[3]