Image provided by: Clackamas Community College; Oregon City, OR
About The Clackamas print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1989-2019 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 30, 2005)
Clackamas Print Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2005 Commentary 5 Intelligent Design’ not smart [ople need to face [facts; “Intelligent esign ” isn’t science ,E. West mi Editor “In the beginning God cre- d the heavens’ and the earth For centuries these words lithe stories that follow them ed Europe as the sole expía- ion for the origins of the rid we live in. But this was ing the Dark and Middle es, when empirical observa- íwas taking a long siesta. In the centuries since the aissance and Protestant ormation, Europe and the I of the world has learned to b notice of the world around m; to learn through care observation the processes ¡which life and the universe rks and apply the knowledge ed for the benefit (and yes, asionally the detriment) of anity. ■To this end a procedure has n developed by which we | be reasonably assured that 1 own biases and a priori pmptions do not insinuate mselves into our investi os, giving us potentially ty and harmful conclusions. I call this the “scientific thod,” and it has produced Bunding results. today the process of scien ce method is under attack in ■biology labs of public edu- ■on, the yery place it should ■e center stage. Education ■arils across the nation have leen inundated with the cries of ■ocal minority of Americans Iho wish to see Creationism reintroduced into our schools under the + guise of a “scien- j tific theory” called -3 Intelligent Design. School boards .1 in more than half '1 a dozen states from J . Pennsylvania to Montana. have con- s i d e r e d.j altering^ their cur- - riculum • to . incorjlll p o r a t e . ID. One state in particular has gone I further than mere I c o n s i d - I eration. ,3 ° n Nov. fl 8 the K a n s a s Board of Educational voted 6 - 4 that students will be expected to learn that a vari- • est e v o - lution- ary con cepts are “contro versial,” a battle-cry. of Intelligent Design advocates who stress that sympa thetic educators | should “teach i the controver- | sy” in order | to undermine t Darwinian f evolution. I The board does not have the authority to directly set cur- riculum for local school dis tricts, but by setting stan dards for statewide testing fc, they can do so in effect. In order to allow ID in Kansas schools the board has had to do a bit of creative reworking of the definition of science. The phrase “a search for expla nations of observable phe nomena” has been dropped from the school board’s def inition. The reasoning • behind | this is fairly logical: the I emphasis on “observable” I would make the inclusion f of ID glaringly contradic- f tory. This is because the best that proponents of ID can offer by way of proof is that one can infer a cre ator from the complexity of life. The proponents of ID are overwhelmingly funda mentalist-Christians, and for them to suggest that God can be observed directly would undermine their claim that blind faith in Jesus Christ is the only’path to salvation. Take the empiricism out of empirical science, they reason, and one has a definition of sci ence that will allow even reli gious dogma as fact. The effect of all this is that students in Kansas pub lic schools will not be taught the central concept of sci entific inquiry; that useful and revolutionary things can be learned through patient and unbiased examination of empirical data. The supposed “theory” of Intelligent Design meets almost none of the criteria for an acceptable scientific theory. The idea has been rejected as a working hypothesis by a vast majority within the scientific community who agree that evo lution through natural selec tion best explains our current understanding of life, and who further see the question of a Creator as standing outside the purview of proper natural sci ence. Thé Kansas Board of Education was well aware of this fact before their action. In voting in the changes the board was ignoring the rec ommendations of a 26-mem- ber science committee, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Science Teachers Association and 37 Nobel lau reates who wrote an impas sioned plea for the board to maintain a more mainstream stance on evolution. This debacle of bad poli tics and even worse science is fueled by a gross misunder standing of science and sci entific method itself. Since most scientists agree that it’s rather difficult to see God through even the most pow erful of telescopes, only the rriost rash and arrogant of sci entists will declare that God does not exist. After all, it is a maxim of science that absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. Science properly pursued can make no claims about those things that are above or beyond the natural, phenomenal world. Because of that, theology and other pursuits that do make claims about the supernatural have no place in science cur riculum. God belongs in our inves tigations of literature, phi losophy and ethics, where we contemplate the allegories and -stories that guide us as moral creatures. He does not belong in the biology lab. bin the forces of darkness: offer observational astronomy laura Cameron giumentari/ Editor wasting resources is never bod thing. Polluted rivers, extinct spe- s and outrageous gas prices jail proof of this. Nobody h to see something use- go to waste, but that is Ictly what’s happening here ■Clackamas Community liege. fVe have a beautiful, ly functional astronomi- lobservatory located right here on campus. The Haggart Memorial Observatory, tucked away among the trees of the Environmental Learning Center, is a fantastic resource for every student who has ever looked up at night and been filled with wonder. A 24-inch refractor - perfect for view ing deep-sky objects - and a host of smaller telescopes exist there for our viewing pleasure. With a facility like the Haggart Observatory at its disposal, most people would expect the college :to be offering a host of astronomy courses centered around the Observatory. I was shocked upon my arrival at Clackamas last year to discover that the college offers not a sin gle observational astronomy class. Astronomy is not complete ly lacking from the course list - two or three classes can be found in the catalogue each term. But astronomy is really a twofold science, and. Clackaihas only offers one part of it: the physical side. Take a look in the course catalogue. Astronomy is almost always listed under “physics.” Now, the physical side of astronomy - orbital dynamics and the like - is both important and fascinat ing. But there’s more to spy ing the heavens than math. If I take an astronomy course, I don’t want to spend it looking at pictures of stars in books. I want to"bundle up in a heavy jacket, pour up a thermos of hot chocolate and spend a cold, clear night in intimate contact with an eye piece, drinking in the wonder of the universe. Only three astronomy courses were offered this term, All were physical astronomy. All were online courses. Meanwhile, the 24- inch refractor sits idle most nights, when it should be- introducing another genera tion of starry-eyed students to the wonders of the Orion Nebula, the jewel-like binary system of alpha Scorpii, or the crenulated terminator of the moon. What a shame. What a waste.
