So apparently Der Spiegel’s Jen Lubbadeh (Der Spiegel is a famous German newspaper) wants the world to know that America is not the only battle ground for Creationism or Intelligent Design.
I just want to make a few comments on Intelligent Design and point out why this particular piece by Lubbadeh is an example of terrible journalism. Here is an except from the article:
Fundamentalist Christians who believe in creationism — which holds that God created the world and humanity in the manner described in the Bible — reject the principle of evolution and are striking back. They are pushing for the use of school texts that vilify the theory of evolution as a mere ideology. They have sued to have the theory of intelligent design — a water-down version of creationism — taught in biology courses at the same time as evolution, as both an equally valid scientific theory and alternative to evolution.
In case you missed it, let me point out the glaring inconsistency found in this short paragraph. Which is it? Do “fundamentalist Christians” want to “vilify the theory of evolution as mere ideology” or do they want intelligent design taught alongside evolution as “an equally valid scientific theory and alternative to evolution”? Those two agendas do not square up? Which is it? This is a bit of underhanded journalism–setting “Creationists” up as villans before revealing the heart of their agenda–to present Intelligent Design as an “equally valid scientific theory.” This is underhanded because we are given the sense that ID proponents are out to vilify evolutionists before we really find out what ID proponents hope to accomplish.
The second glaringly bad aspect of this peice of journalism is the fact that the author cites numerous peices of evidence that there are many Creationists or Intelligent Design adherents in Europe but none of these people were given the chance to comment or defend their position. Aparrently 40% of British people want creationism taught in biology classes, but none of those 40% could be found for comment!?!?!? That is hard to believe. Lubbadeh, however, was able to find many evolutionary scientists to comment on the subject, yet none of the many credible voices for ID were allowed to comment. Instead Lubbadeh describes these Creationists as using “guerilla tactics” to expose gaps in evolutionary science. How is that “guerilla tactics” if their are a few questions that evolutionists cannot answer, that is fine, but as the number of those questions start to sky-rocket, then your theory becomes less and less credible–should not science welcome the advent of questions concerning their theories? If the theory is true it will stand.
Alright, one more quote then I am done:
Intelligent design and creationism, on the other hand, are not scientific theories because they aren’t falsifiable: They postulate the existence of a deity, a divine creation and guided evolution — all things that can never be empirically proved or disproved.
I just wish the same logic could be honestly applied to evolution. Evolution postulates some grand claims and its most important claims cannot be empirically proved. For instance, it cannot be empirically proved that the universe arose out of the big bang. In addition, it cannot be empirically proved where life originated from–evolution says life came from single-celled organisms but where did those single-celled organisms arise from? Bottom line is that evolution cannot answer that question. Again, I just wish the same above logic could be honestly applied to the theory of evolution.