Re: Beverly Kelley’s Aug. 22 commentary, “Public not buying ‘I.D. is not science’ argument”:
Kelley presents an apparent objective analysis of the public’s acceptance of pseudo sciences, while she also promotes the so-called intelligent design theory.”
Increasingly, American science and scholarship, reason itself, are under attack by those who lump them in with pejorative catch-all phrases such as “secular humanism,” and “the liberal left.”
At the core of the attack are those whose religion-based beliefs are held as primary to any verifiable, replicable, scientific proofs.
Kelley cites molecular biology's, “revelation that life is staggeringly and unexpectedly more complex than evolution can explain,” and the “mathematical findings that casts serious doubt on the power of natural selection to accomplish macro-evolutionary changes.”
She fails to note that these are only intellectual arguments and that, because they are proposed, it does not mean they should be believed or, worse, be taught as science or treated as fact.
In Aug. 22 edition of The New Yorker, Hendrik Hertzberg comments on the molecular biology argument Kelley cites: “It is not even a theory, in the scientific sense, because it is untestable and unsupportable by empiricle evidence. It is a last-ditch skirmish in a misguided war against reason that cannot be won and, for religion’s sake as well as science’s, should not be fought.”
Those who believe in intelligent design theory, the creationist explanation for life, are entitled to believe what they wish. However, in light of reason-based human progress, and the long and beneficial results of the scientific method, which one must assume is also God-given, we should not mask unscientific premises, our fundamental belief systems, as being on a par with those that have undergone the simple, basic and rigorous tests of scientific inquiry.
That, quite simply, is un-reasonable.
— Joseph Benti, Camarillo