Recently, Karl Giberson, author of Saving Darwin and former BioLogian, claimed the following in the Huffington Post, about the Seattle-based Discovery Institute:
In their minds the possibility that the earth is 10,000 years old is an open question, even though geologists settled that one in the 18th century. They still think that Adam and Eve were real people and Noah may have rescued all the animals in the ark — claims settled in the 19th century. But most of their energy is spent promoting the idea that Darwin’s theory of evolution is implausible nonsense or, at best, a controversial theory with widespread scientific dissent.
Why on earth would anyone write such obvious nonsense? As John West observes at Evolution News & Views,
Notably, Giberson doesn’t provide any documentation for these claims. That’s because they are absolutely false. As in, made up. As in, completely untrue. I’ve been involved with Discovery Institute before the Institute even had its program on intelligent design, and we’ve never advocated teaching the things he says in science class.
Yes, but our brains were shaped for fitness, not for truth, right? Sometimes truth is adaptive, sometimes it isn’t. Why should Giberson be expected to stick to truth if he thinks God is a Darwinist? (I don’t care, I am just wondering.)
To be perfectly clear, we don’t even favor teaching about intelligent design in K-12 classes. Still less do we support banning the teaching of evolution, despite Giberson’s additional false claim that our “real agenda” is “to get evolution out of the public schools.”
On the contrary, we think science students should learn more about evolutionary theory, not less. That includes the best evidence for modern evolutionary theory, but it also includes scientific disputes over key evolutionary claims already being aired in mainstream peer-reviewed science journals. These include disputes over the creative power of the mutation-selection mechanism: How much can natural selection acting on random mutations actually accomplish?
I don’t know how that stuff can possibly be handled in schools whose biggest need seems to be armed security guards, and whose most notable product is precious little asshats, raising hell against profs and adminbots later at the U.
If Giberson disagrees with the criticisms of Darwinian theory raised by scientists in the intelligent design community, he should take the time to respond to those criticisms rather than spread falsehoods.
We all rate a better informed class of critic. Especially now:
— about 3:15 pm EST —
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #26,215 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #4 in Books > Science & Math > Evolution > Organic
- #7 in Books > Science & Math > Biological Sciences > Paleontology
- #8 in Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Theology > Creationism
Follow UD News at Twitter!