Would Intelligent Design Proponent Michael Behe consider Astrology a
valid high school subject?
Dover, Pennsylvania School Board Court case on the teaching of Intelligent
Design
From Oct 18, 2005 Court Transcripts
Michael Behe
on whether or nor Intelligent Design is a scientific theory according the
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) definition.
Question: Now, you claim that intelligent design is a scientific
theory.
Behe: Yes.
Question But when you call it a scientific theory, you're
NOT defining that term the same way that the National Academy of Sciences does.
Behe: Yes, that's correct. (p.34)
>
Question: And actually you said at your deposition, I
don't think intelligent design falls under this definition. Correct? (referring to
the NAS definition)
Behe: Yeah, and that's after I said -- if I may see where in my
deposition that is? I m sorry. (p.35)
Note: Behe had testified the previous day that the NAS was the most
prestigious scientific organization in the United States, so one might suppose
their standards are probably relevant. (p.49)
Behe's previous deposition was then entered into evidence. It stated:
Question: "Let's be clear here, I m asking -- looking at the
definition of a scientific theory in its entirety, is it your position that
intelligent design is a scientific theory?" And you said, going down to line
23, "I think one can argue these a variety of ways. For purposes of an answer to
the -- relatively brief answer to the question, I will say that I don't think
it falls under this." (p.35)
When pressed on this issue, he then says that that's not what he intended to
say, and that he might argue it either way; but he successfully avoids actually
answering the question again.
He then goes on to state that when he calls Intelligent Design a theory, he's
using his own broader definition of theory as opposed to the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) definition.
When questioned about what qualifies as theory under HIS definition:
Question: But you are clear, under your definition, the
definition that sweeps in intelligent design,
astrology is also a
scientific theory, correct?
Behe: Yes, that's correct. (p.38)
Does this mean that if we teach Intelligent Design because
it is a valid theory, then using the same definition for theory, we must also
teach astrology?
(astrology = predicting the future based on the
position of the stars and planets)?
From www.epicidiot.com
See
www.epicidiot.com/evo_cre/astrology_high_school.htm for the full article
Blog
