Science Reporting

CSC Director Dr. Stephen Meyer yesterday had a lengthy and informative piece — eloquently making the positive case for intelligent design– published in the National Post in Canada.

Often, there are criticisms from the media that the theory of intelligent design is just an argument from ignorance. How many times have you read this tired, old description of ID: “life seems so complex evolution can’t be the answer, must have been a supernatural power.” Meyer’s piece answers this and shows how recent scientific discoveries and standard methods of scientific reasoning guides our inferences about the origins and diversity of the universe and living systems.

My old college town paper, the Lawrence Journal-World, reports that two new classes at the University of Kansas will work to discredit the theory of intelligent design. One class, taught by religion professor Paul Mirecki, chairman of KU’s religious studies department, was initially titled Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationism and Other Religious Mythologies. In an e-mail to an atheist listserv, Mirecki wrote: “The fundies [fundamentalists] want it all taught in a science class, but this will be a nice slap in their big fat face by teaching it as a religious studies class under the category mythology.”

Charles Krauthammer’s syndicated essay against intelligent design ran opposite mine in today’s Seattle Times. The piece is full of problems, which Tom Gilson and Lawrence Seldon explore in loving detail here and here.

Now I would have framed a couple of points in their otherwise fine analysis a little differently. In one place,