"I KNOW that Newton was correct and I BELIEVE that Darwin and Einstein were also correct."
The above phrase is what I would hear from professional Astrophysicists when I was studying under them from 1967 to 1978.
Note how they knew the difference between "KNOWING" and "BELIEVING" . This is because Astrophysics is a "HARD" science which allows no nonsense or political bias.
REAL scientists "DO" science. The people on both sides of the Intelligent Design argument just "USE" science to promote their personal beliefs. They act as if science is a salad bar where one can pick out what one likes while rejecting (and hiding) what they don't like.
The fact that you see many lefties attacking I.D. and not Astrophysicists shows that what is going on here is far more political than scientific.
And note that the people attacking I.D. have no interest in following the rules of scientific inquiry. They just want Darwinism to trump Religion and don't care how it's done.
From ten years of experience I would guess that 40% of American Astrophysicists are atheists, but not left-wing atheists. And both believers and non-believers dislike the "secular humanist" branch of atheism as they have the nerve to claim that they represent science while they don't follow its rules. This gives a false view of science and scientists as a bunch of left-wing atheistic amoral inhuman creatures out to attack anything important to the general public.
But it is a horror for real scientists when pseudo-scientists claim to speak for science and then say stupid things.
Let's go through some of the quotes of these people that I heard or read.
" I am as sure of Evolution as I am that 2+2=4 !!!"
What people like this man have done is to adopt science as a "Religion-Substitute" which no real scientist would do. It is quite a 'Leap of FAITH' to equate 2+2=4 with any Non-Law Theory. No matter how much a real scientist hopes that Darwin will be someday proved correct he would never, never say it is a fact before it becomes a law. These Darwin-worshippers have been stopped short of Evolution becoming a Law so they use "Emotion" to bridge the gap. They love science so much that they lie for it and fool themselves. They really, really want it to be so and so, to them, it becomes so.
This writer hopes that both Darwin and Einstein are eventually proven correct but they have not been no matter how much I wish it to be.
Neither side seems to understand what a "Theory" is, either. The right-wingers seem to think a Theory is "any old thing some one may claim off the top of one's head" while the left-wingers act like a Theory is actually a Law except for some tiny technicality. Haven't either side watched any T.V. crime shows? In them the detectives keep picking up clues until they reach the point that only 'ONE' person can fit 'ALL' the clues. When a scientist has 'some' definite clues but not "all' the information needed to prove something it is a "Theory"
Both Relativity and Evolution have "some" things found that hint they are correct but not enough to prove without a doubt. Note also that Relativity is from a "HARD" science ( PHYSICS: much Math) and Evolution is from a "SOFT" science ( BIOLOGY: little Math). So the odds are that Einstein, if true, would be proven before Darwin.
Astronomy, Physics, and Mathematics are the three most difficult subjects in college. Then there is a big gap between them and Engineering. Then another big gap between Engineering and the other degrees. People who fail Astro, Physics, or Math get "A"s in Engineering but failed Engineers get "A"s in anything else.
Biology degrees are a dime a dozen. Years ago I found a 1978 book that listed the numbers of each degree awarded. There were one million handed out that year and over one hundred thousand were in "Education" (Phi Beta Kappa does not recognize Education as a true degree). Next was Biology with about 80,000. Every left-wing tree-hugger wants a Bio Degree so those people are very easy to find to support Evolution.
There were twenty degrees in Astrophysics that year. So it's much easier to find people who do not follow the rules of scientific inquiry than those who do.
The general principle of most Astrophysicists I've known was that Public School students are "MINORS" and "MINORS" should only be taught scientific "LAWS", not scientific "THEORIES". Because they are a captive audience and too many teachers with "Education degrees" would promote Theories as Laws.
It is true that this would remove Intelligent Design, but it would also remove both Relativity and Evolution. The idea that "YOU" are sure that a theory you like is actually a "Law" and therefore should be forced on other people's children is totalitarian. Here is another quote: " ....... INCOMPLETE, MORE COMING...
My Snazzy List of Links