EVOLUTION FOES SHALL NEVER SUCCEED, EXCEPT IN SOWING CONFUSION ABOUT SCIENCE.

[Stuart G. Poss]

Creationists will never be able to reduce science to farce, only appeal to
farce and sophism to confuse the uneducated and those difficient in their
ability to observe and think critically about their observations.

Regretably, it is as yet impossible to legislate a requirement for
intelligence or establish it through electoral mandate.  The adage that the
price of freedom requires constant vigilance almost certainly also holds true
for the price of doing science.  Perhaps in some respects little has changed
since the tribulations of Galileo Galilei, when he faced [and eventually
emerge victorious] those upset by the findings of his science.  However,
unlike in his day, it is at least reassuring that with constant efforts to
educate our contemporaries, at least an electoral majority now seem to be able
to differentiate between science and religion, or at least treasure the value
of science.   Perhaps if we work a little harder, the size of the majority
will continue to increase signficantly.  Looking back on it, it would seem
some progress has been made since the 16th century.

I am still trying to find a creationist who seems able to fashion a cogent,
non-evolutionary explanation for why the HOX genes in lancelets that encode
for the organization of their brain are virtually identical with those of
humans that encode for the organizaton of our own hindbrain.  When if I do,
I expect that I will find someone who could use a lesson in zoology.

Perhaps with sufficient understanding of HOX genes and related gene families,
scientists of the future may someday be able to at least partially correct
such difficiencies.


John Grehan wrote:

> OK. That's nice... :>)
> But, don't relax. Notice the percentages by which those "wins"
> won. Not very convincing. Nonetheless, OK.
>
> Peter
>
> I will suggest that the result actually represents a great victory for
> Creationists. While they may have had a political setback, its not
> necessarily permanent. What is more important is the validation of their
> view that teaching science is to be determined through popular vote of
> laypersons. In this context creationists have reduced science to farce, and
> in this situation I think many evolutionists may also be culpable.
>
> John Grehan