Ben Stein, of Ferris Bueller fame, will soon be releasing a new documentary entitled "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," which claims to detail how those in the scientific community who are proponents of intelligent design (ID) have been unfairly fired and ridiculed by their colleagues. Besides acting as an attack on academia in general, the movie is a catalyst for those who support teaching an alternative theory to evolution in our public school science classes.
Many of you may be in favor of children learning about ID and evolution and then choosing for themselves which they believe. However, ID is so problematic and rooted in theology that it would be a serious threat to our society as a whole if it were integrated into our classrooms. ID serves as an alternative theory of humanity's origins, claiming that present-day Homo sapiens never evolved from a lower species. Instead, it promotes the idea that some higher power created us in our present form.
One of the many problems with this idea is that it is not rooted in any science. Its proponents are mostly Christians who are worried about the growing secularity of our nation and have decided to take it out on our children. Evolution is no longer in question by any stretch of the imagination. For the past 150 years, scientists have been running tests and experiments to validate the theory of evolution, and never has there been substantial evidence to suggest that Darwin's idea of species evolving from lower organisms is wrong. However, those in favor of ID poke imaginary holes in the theory of evolution, creating faulty arguments and manipulating the words of respected scientists.
In 2005, the school board of Dover, Penn. decided that they were going to make their teachers read a disclaimer saying that the theory of evolution had many flaws and that ID served as a plausible explanation for the origins of mankind. However, when angry parents objected to their children being taught this information, they sued. The case, Kitzmiller v. Dover, reached a U.S. federal court that would serve as (hopefully) a final battleground between ID and evolution.
Arguing for the side of ID was the Thomas More Law Center, which brought its best lawyers and scientists for the case. On evolution's side were a variety of intelligent and respected professionals including the ACLU, Dr. Ken Miller of Brown University and Dr. Barbara Forrest of Southeastern Louisiana University. When the ID-ers brought out Lehigh biology professor Michael Behe to disprove evolution, Dr. Miller was there to tell the court why Behe's critique was fundamentally flawed (and to prove evolution true in the process).
When the More Law Center tried to persuade Judge Jones that ID was not religious, Dr. Forrest was there to trace the history of ID to its roots in Christianity and creationism. In the end, Judge Jones, a conservative Bush appointee, declared that "the overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory." The verdict was in, and ID was out.
But in the ID-ers' defense, they certainly do not quit easily. They are back, this time led by Ben Stein, and hold a new mantra: "Teach the controversy!" They argue that noble scientists who reject evolution are being abused and fired, and that no one can speak up for ID without being shot down. But the fact of the matter is that there is no controversy. In the scientific community, evolution is an accepted theory that has never been proven false. The ID-ers are trying to manipulate Americans by creating a clash where none exists, fabricating a conflict between brave proponents of ID and evil, atheistic scientists.
But if there is anyone who should be ashamed of themselves, it should be those in favor of ID. Instead of trying to establish that ID has a legitimate, scientific theory, they have attempted to take ID and force the courts to implement it. They have decided to bypass the scientific method, skip any objective scrutiny and put their theory straight into the textbooks of our youth.
What these people must realize is that science is not directed by vote. Rather, it is dictated by fact. Hypothetically, we could hold a vote tomorrow on whether or not water freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit. If 96 percent of us decided that it did not, it really would not make a difference. The laws of nature do not change just because we want them to change.
In the end, intelligent design, like the Duesberg Hypothesis for AIDS or the geocentric model of the universe, will eventually die out as a non-scientific theory. Its proponents will turn to other areas - maybe the math or history departments - and attempt to implement their theistic ideas there.
In the meantime, however, we still have to be wary of such a dangerous idea, before our textbooks have warnings claiming that "gravity" is only a theory as well.
Patrick Andriola is a freshman who has not yet declared a major.
