Monday, September 26, 2005
Ongoing ID Idiocy
New Scientist, you know better. "Intelligent Design" is neither an "alternative to evolution," nor is it controversial: it has no basis in any kind of science, it is a religious philosophy (apologies to philosophers, I'm using that term loosely). The few persons calling themselves scientists who support ID are not generally well represented in the literature. That means, in essence, that they don't do much credible work - if they do and choose not to have it published, then they may as well not have done it.
Shame, shame, shame on NS for giving any space at all to this crap, and double shame for them giving it any credence. Journalistic balance is nice, but it is not appropriate to science.
Shame, shame, shame on NS for giving any space at all to this crap, and double shame for them giving it any credence. Journalistic balance is nice, but it is not appropriate to science.
