Home > culture > Closing debate on scientific truth?

Closing debate on scientific truth?

February 14, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments

We are celebrating the 200th anniversaries of the birth of Darwin and Lincoln this week so much is being written in support of Darwin and evolution.  Here, an attempt is made to link Lincoln and Darwin.  I hope this is not the common agenda of most scientists.  Dr. Michael Wolfe writes

Democracy needs to evolve to the point where our representatives cannot vote on matters of scientific truth, just as a majority should not be able to vote to deny the rights of a minority.

Sounds like he wants to elevate arguments against evolution to the category of hate crimes? Why do evolutionists fear healthy debate?

Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, and through this executive order, set the stage for the total abolition of slavery in this country. In the same way, national standards for science education should be established so that state and municipal boards of education cannot work to deny the truth of evolution and cause distraction and confusion by having scientifically inaccurate and indefensible alternatives taught in the science classroom and espoused in science textbooks.

Lincoln saved our union from dissolution and opened our minds to the equality of man. Darwin unified biology and opened our minds to the origin of man. Today we should proudly celebrate both men and their legacies. And let’s recommit ourselves, as President Obama said in his inaugural address, to “restoring science to its rightful place”.

Wolfe’s point earlier in the article, “nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution.”  He further states,

“As a biomedical researcher, I can attest that we routinely use the genetic relationship between humans and other organisms (including yeast, worms, flies and mice) to discover important processes involved in human health and disease. Not only is evolution true, it is practical; we need the insight it offers to understand and treat illness.

Why not admit that these genetic relationships may reflect a common creator rather than a common evolutionay link?

Advertisements
  1. February 14, 2009 at 7:57 am

    “Democracy needs to evolve to the point where our representatives cannot vote on matters of scientific truth.” In other words, a minority (i.e. scientists) gets to decide what the truth is, and the rest of the electorate (i.e. everybody whose taxes fund the science) can go hang.

    Doesn’t sound like the good scientist is much of a champion for democracy, does it?

    As Einstein said, “God is subtle but he is not malicious.” (That’s more than you can say for some scientists these days!)

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: