I was unable to access the interview with Sue Gamble, but egad, you
have to be kidding! "Intelligent design" is just old-fashioned
creationism in secular clothing -- why in the world would anyone on
this list advocate teaching it alongside evolution? It'd be sort of
like teaching astrology alongside astronomy (as part of the history
of astronomy it would be quite reasonable, of course, as would
mention of, say, William Paley or Bishop Wilberforce as part of the
history of evolution).
-W2
On Nov 8, 2005, at 3:46 PM, David Alan Walker wrote:
> Having heard Sue Gamble (of the Kansas State Board of Education)
> explain, so eloquently, why ”Intelligent Design” ought not to be
> taught alongside Evolution, I feel impelled to ask Plant Ed
> contributors how they feel about this matter? If you missed it, you
> can ‘Listen Again’ to her on the BBC ‘Today Programme’.
> Simply go to
>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/progs/listenagain.shtml#t,>> select 'Today' and 'Listen'. Then, by moving a marker along a bar
> until it reads 2:47:23 (hours minutes and seconds into the
> broadcast) you will find that she started to speak round then.
>> Best regards
>> David
>> From David Walker, FRS., Emeritus Professor of Photosynthesis,
> University of Sheffield, UK.
>http://www.oxygraphics.co.uk/>> _______________________________________________
> Plant-ed mailing list
>Plant-ed at net.bio.net>http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/plant-ed
William E. Williams <mailto:WEWilliams at smcm.edu>
Professor of Biology
Saint Mary's College of Maryland
18952 E Fisher Rd, Saint Marys City, MD 20686
(240)895-4365
