Author
|
Topic: One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough (Read 961 times) |
|
David Lucifer
Archon
Posts: 2642
Reputation: 8.56
Rate David Lucifer
Enlighten me.
  
|
 |
One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough
« on: 2006-05-31 18:35:28 » |
 |
vector: evol-psych list
One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough
H. J. Muller (1959)
The Independent 31 May 2006
Charles Darwin, the uncelebrated scientist
Philip Hensher
The other day, I was lucky enough to have dinner with Sir Martin Rees, the
Astronomer Royal, who had an interesting story to tell.
He reported talking to a senior figure at the Smithsonian Institute, and
complimenting them on their contributions to the centenary celebrations of
Einstein's annus mirabilis of 1905, and their work during 2005, designated
an "international year of physics". There is, of course, he remarked, a
still more resonant anniversary coming up in 2009. That marks not only the
200th anniversary of Darwin's birth, but the 150th anniversary of the first
publication of The Origin of Species. What, he asked, did the Smithsonian
have planned to mark that?
According to Sir Martin, the principal American institution entrusted with
the public understanding of science is having difficulty in mounting any
kind of celebration at all, and there may well be none. Not that they
wouldn't like to, of course: but there are distinct difficulties in getting
any funding to increase any awareness of Darwin's ideas.
I would very much like to pass this on as no more than dinner-party chit-
chat, but one doesn't readily discount the account of Sir Martin, and it
seems quite appallingly plausible. Anti-Darwinists have been gaining in
confidence over the last few years, and increasingly, alternative "theories"
of life are being taught in schools and universities.
Bald creationism and its absurdly mock-plausible alternative, "intelligent
design", are everywhere being taught as alternative theories to Darwin's
theory of evolution. Even here, they are creeping into syllabuses - the new
GCSE biology syllabus includes discussion of creationism, and it has been
widely reported that medical students of religious bent are starting to
demand acknowledgement of citations of the Bible and of the Koran as
scientific texts.
The inclusion of undisprovable mythologies within scientific education as if
they were on a par with proper theories of life is bad enough. At least, in
that context, anybody who is taught evolutionary theory after creationist
fantasies ought to be able to see the distinction, and it should only be a
problem of time-wasting. But, if this story about the Smithsonian has any
basis, it is clear that creationists will not stop there. They don't want
Darwinian thought to be given any kind of public dissemination. They want
creationism to be taught as if it were the correct answer to these major
questions. If, by insisting that any survey of Darwin's work be "balanced"
by deluded accounts of God's creation of the world, they can prevent any
kind of explanation of life and evolution at all, they will be perfectly
happy. They don't, in fact, want the debate they constantly call for; they
just want to be declared right.
Of course, no reputable scientific institution could possibly mount any kind
of event devoted to explaining creationism and "intelligent design", and if
that is the condition, nothing will take place. I sincerely hope that there
is some misunderstanding here; despite the august source of my information,
I can't honestly believe that the Smithsonian is unable to go ahead with
celebrations of one of the greatest scientific thinkers in history. Nothing,
however, is impossible in America nowadays, and we should all encourage the
institute to think again, and that any celebrations should not be mounted on
the pretence of staging debates where, in reality, there is none to be had.
Inhumanitas omni aetate molesta est
|
|
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4289
Reputation: 8.52
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough
« Reply #1 on: 2006-05-31 19:31:28 » |
|
In confirmation, Hermit points to Blunderov's post on this issue at Dear Google and the American Natural History Museum. Thanks for all the fish, Reply #2 on: 2005-11-24
MALO IN PARTIBVS INFIDELIVM VOS QVOQVE REPERIO VERVM
*Translations for Blunderov:
Inhumanitas omni aetate molesta est : inhumanity is always harmful [Cicero]
malo : I have a preference for
in partibus infidelium vos quoque reperio verum : where there are atheists, there is also truth [Hermit]
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
|
Logged
