The ongoing battle to force Not so Intelligent Design into South Carolina's science classrooms is headed back to the Department of Education after the EOC voted 10-2 to add language to the Biology standards that would allow the teaching of Intelligent Design.
Fortunately, the Department of Education is the group that makes the final determination on the issue, the EOC point of view is just advisory (and political). Unfortunately, one of the persons who drafted the language that the EOC endorsed is Bob Staton, who is a Republican running for State Superintendent of Education.
It is clear that this is just another effort to force a fundamentalist Christian religious perspective into the public schools. Rep. Mike Fair (R-Greenville) is the big propionate of Not so Intelligent Design, going so far as to pay to fly in two Discovery Institute approved 'experts' to testify on this issue. He is arguing that "We've worked hard at coming up with some balance". The trouble is.
Science is not about balance.
Science is about proven truth and tested theories, and when you look at the history of the creationism movement (now the Intelligent Design movement) it is clear that creationism was not and Intelligent Design is not science. The Chicago Tribune has a good article that looks at how science that is being done right now, science that is only a few years old, is destroying the Not so Intelligent Design thesis.
ID tends to argue that some aspects of biology are so complex that they could not have evolved. These features had to have been custom designed by a higher being (this could be God, or Space Aliens, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster). Only 10 years ago they pointed to the Eye, the tails of sperm, blood clotting and immune system evolution as proof of ID.
Well in the last decade scientist who have been studying evolution got to the point where they could start to study these varied areas. Guess what, Those systems, once considered so "irreducibly complex" as to defy understanding are now starting to be understood.
This understanding is not coming in an effort to discredit ID, but simply as a matter of course in the ongoing study of the theory of evolution.
This is where it becomes clear the ID is not science. If Intelligent Design was the scientific principal in place, there would be no effort to study this. The question has been resolved, God (or Space Aliens or the Flying Spaghetti Monster) did it. Not so Intelligent Design is actually an anti-science, encouraging students to not ask questions.
And the Republicans in South Carolina think it should be taught to our students.
I guess it is getting close to the time to warm up the lawyers who took on the Dover case. As a concerned parent of two children who could be impacted, this faux science can not be allowed into our schools.
Mike Fair Intelligent Design