Dear Mr. Wolcott;
Regarding the charge that Big Science expels ID [Intelligent Design] scientists and quashes ID research, please see http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth The National Center for Science Education has expended a great amount of effort to present issues and events while avoiding misrepresentations, half-truths, disingenuous innuendos, doctored quotes, and misleading inferences -- unlike 'Expelled.'
I agree that ID proponents be allowed their right to freedom of speech, which they certainly have. But within scientific methodology, not all ideas are of equal scientific merit. ID is a concept that (1) leads to no testable predictions and (2) cannot be falsified - both requirements of scientific theories and hypotheses.
One of the major messages in Expelled is that 'science,' or scientific methodology, would be better if it were broadened to include 'design.' Dr. Dembski, featured in Expelled, has been saying for 18 years that scientific advancements using ID concepts are forthcoming. As a Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture, he has had the resources to make good on that forecast, but to no avail.
Digital Access for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
National Center for Science Education
Mr. Movie writes:
Thanks for writing.
I had no clue I would get this much response from a movie review. And to get one from an organization as prestigious as yours is an honor.
Here's my answer. I'm not a scientist. But I'm also not uneducated and I read quite a bit about the subject.
You can throw a website up here and you can tell me how intelligent design is bad science and that you're not trying to keep it away from anyone forever and you won't convince me.
Your statement that not all ideas are of equal scientific merit is a good place to begin. I could make the same statement of your point of view. To mere mortals like me, there is more evidence in the universe for an intelligent designer than against one. When you get into quantum physics and the mathematics of the subject, your argument for an accidental/random/just kind of popped into existence all by itself with no plan whatsoever/ universe gets creamed.
You can tell me that scientists are open to this debate, but most are not. You're right, and that's that. End of discussion.
And you need to know this: not everyone who believes in intelligent design thinks the traditional Biblical view of the creation of the universe is correct. Your science is pretty solid. Billions of years definitely works.
What you're missing -- and that I'm amazed you can't see -- is the designer.
Thanks for writing.