There an interesting piece in The American Scientist by Pat Shipman on how best to swat down ID. It’s interesting not because its arguments against ID or on behalf of evolution are strong, but because of the psychology it portrays: panic, damage control, and denial (the denial being that there might be anything fundamentally amiss with conventional evolutionary theory). As you read it, think of the cigarette companies 50 years ago attempting to swat down claims that cigarette smoking is dangerous to your health. Shipman is a company man to the core, representing vested interests that have everything to lose.
Being Stalked by Intelligent Design
Scientists must stop ignoring Intelligent DesignÃ¢â‚¬â€religious prejudice disguised as intellectual freedom
By Pat Shipman
American Scientist [for full article go here]
. . . ID is an insidious attempt by a religious caucus to impose its views on the whole country. The avowed aim of ID advocatesÃ¢â‚¬â€to undermine science and replace it with their personal religious convictionsÃ¢â‚¬â€amounts to a form of prejudice that is both poisonous and horribly frightening. Inevitably, young people will suffer most. As Francisco Ayala wrote in “From the President” (July-August 2004), science training will be a fundamental necessity in the technological world of the future.
As scientists, we must stop ignoring the ID movement. It won’t go away. Each of us must learn to avoid jargon in order to communicate better with the public. Every scientist should become a mentor; share your experience of the wonder and beauty of science! Finally, critically, we must expose Intelligent Design for what it really is: religious prejudice masked as intellectual freedom.
Do not miss the irony of this last sentence. To determine who here exhibits religious prejudice and who here champions intellectual freedom, ask yourself who here is limiting the debate and shutting down discussion of the relative merits of ID and evolutionary theory.