And it annoys the pig
Squire (1) is engaging an Intelligent Design apologist over at his blog. He says he's already received a response to his email, but only teases us with it. No details. The hints of biblical literalism he drops makes it pretty clear what the email contains, though.
I figure this sort of action is pretty much a waste of time. You can not do science if you go into something with your conclusion already decided on. Biblical literalist IDiods (heh, love that word) are so convinced of their interpretation of unquestionable scripture, that, when confronted with evidence that some part of reality contradicts it, they don't doubt the Bible, they doubt the reality. You just can't engage that level of zealotry on an intellectual level.
Science requires an open mind. It requires that you be willing to at least consider that you might be wrong, and question your preconceived notions. Radical notions require significant evidence, yes, but eventually they will be adopted if they are correct. ID is the antithesis of that.
(1) I assume that should be "Squire" and not "The Squire." The latter would just be too pretentious. Bordering on "The Artist" level of pretension. Which would have to be punished by being forced to repeatedly watch Doctor Who: The Movie. The atrocious FOX version.
4 comments:
"Pretentious"ly or not, it is "The Squire." And, I ask cautiously, who is this shrouded-in-secrecy young man? Usually people have some kind of personal info on their blogs, but he's pretty shadowy-figure. Not that I disagree with much of what he has to say, but still... what if he's, you know... a Republican or something... ;-)
No, that would be Illinipundit.
I'm quite definitely a Democrat, and if you want to actually take the effort, I've really been quite lax in hiding my identity.
Your initials wouldn't happen to be K.B., would they?
Post a Comment