Evolution controversy is social, not scientific
I was surprised the Daily staff supported the ‘academic freedom bill’ and took Dr.’s Rich Broughton and Vic Hutchison to task for defending science education. I was surprised, that is, until I learned Ray Martin, editor of the opinion page, is also president of OU’s IDEA club, a student offshoot of the intelligent design movement. The roads leading to the “academic freedom” bill, Senate Bill 320 and IDEA club’s across the country can be traced back to the Discovery Institute, a think tank that fuels the myth of a “scientific controversy” over evolution.
The “controversy” is a purely social one. Just think about it. Modern physics and chemistry are as “God-less” as modern biology (for which evolution is the unifying theory), not because science requires that one be an atheist, but simply because science only advances by seeking natural explanations for phenomena.
The “intelligent designer” fails as a scientific mechanism, and hence is beyond scientific inquiry simply because no ID proponent has suggested any testable hypothesis to explain how the “designer” created anything {except social controversy}. Not surprisingly, the ID movement has produced no new knowledge about the natural world since William Paley first published on the topic in 1802.
Martin and others ignore the real controversies that abound in evolutionary biology in favor of vague “weaknesses”, which any high school student with an excellent biology education can easily counter. If passed, the “academic freedom bill” will make it harder for OU to find such applicants.
- Ola Fincke, professor of zoology
Local bonfires are bad ideas
A.J. Lansdale’s suggestion that readers should have a Valentine’s Day bonfire is not only irresponsible, but also possibly dangerous. In addition, campus, which is located in Cleveland County, is included in the current burn ban.
Individuals who attempt to torch their “hated” Valentine’s garbage may also face charges by the fire marshall if they followed through with A.J.’s ill-advised suggestions.
Daily staff members should be more responsible when writing their columns. They should ensure they are not advocating unsafe ideas to their readers.
- Macy J., OU Staff
Editorial missed truth about evolution “controversy”
The Feb. 11 editorial “Professors show need for academic freedom bill” is dead wrong. The “strengths and weaknesses” the anti-evolutionists constantly talk about turn out to be distortions of science, out-of-context quotes and outright falsehoods. Contrary to your claims, the bill is all about attacking evolution for purely religious reasons.
The Daily’s editorial staff is probably too young to remember the bills the creationists pushed on America in the 1980s. The arguments for them were the same as what you used.
The editorial cited Sen. Randy Brogdon’s bill’s claim not to be about religion. The creationist laws struck down in the 1980s also explicitly claimed to be not about religion. These disingenuous disclaimers have been inserted into creationist-inspired legislation for decades.
You cited public opinion polls to support your position. The polls, likewise, supported the creationist “balanced treatment” bills of the 1980s.
And since when do we use polls to determine what is science?
That you share a common ancestor with an eagle and an oak tree is not controversial in science, and the bill is an attempt to make kids think it is.
I oppose this bill for the same reason why I would oppose a bill demanding the strengths and weaknesses of the Holocaust or the germ theory of disease be taught.
- Michael Hopkins, Norman resident
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
Bubba 3 years, 3 months ago
Hmm, Onward Christian Sloughers! So, by definition, would every failed species comprise God's "Ignorant Design"? Are hese people are so constrained by the ideologies of their churches, they have to go to universities, bastions of free-thinking, to edify themselves with a "going-nowhere" paradigm. Ick!
-Bubba
veda1784 3 years, 3 months ago
Mr.Hopkins and Ms. Fincke were absolutely right about the bill!!!