Finney, a Maryville Republican, said he wants the department to say there's no scientific proof for the theory of evolution and to let schools teach creationism or intelligent design.
That is a fundamental misconception, and one I wish we could somehow hammer into these gomers' heads. There is no scientific proof of anything…proof isn't something scientists deal with at all. It's an inappropriate demand in several ways.
- It singles out evolution, but as I said, there is no scientific proof of anything. Why not question cell theory or electromagnetism?
- If Finney is going to demand "proof", where's the proof for creationism or intelligent design? He's awfully inconsistent.
- The word Finney is actually looking for is not "proof", but "evidence". Evidence is what we look for in science classes. There is evidence for evolution; there is none for creationism or intelligent design. Case closed.
Monday, March 19, 2007
The misuse of the word 'proof'
When arguing with a scientist will not help and will immediately expose you as a moron.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Once long ago, when the late, great Stephen Jay Gould (SJG below) spoke in Houston, a young, foolish man (YFM) stood up during the question session after the lecture and began his question,
* YFM: As someone who opposes evolution, I...
But Gould had been there before, and interrupted (this is not a transcript; it is approximately what was said):
* SJG: Excuse me, do you also oppose gravity?
* YFM: Huh?
* SJG: Gravity? do you also oppose that?
* YFM: Umm...
* SJG: Because gravity is an observed fact, one for which scientists construct theories. Evolution is also an observed fact, for which scientists construct theories. Saying you oppose evolution is as absurd as saying you oppose gravity.
* YFM: (Sits down, bewildered and not knowing quite what happened.)
I miss Gould. A lot.
Nice!
PZ Myers seems to be holding his own against creationists though...
Post a Comment