Sunday, June 1, 2008
My naive attempt to protect the people of Mobile from "intelligent design"
Letters and columns in favor of "intelligent design" (ID) have been appearing regularly in our local newspaper, the Mobile Press Register.
When a retired electrician was allowed a pro-ID rant for an entire half-page in early May 2008, where he joyfully announced that our illustrious Alabama State Senate has passed a resolution recognizing "non-religious intelligent design" as a legitimate science -- and went on to call on Boards of Education to start considering the insertion of this "new" ID into the science classes -- I was so horrified that I could no longer stay silent. I submitted my own column, which was titled "Don't be distracted by 'intelligent design'" and published on the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, 2008.
To read my published column, click here.
All column submissions were required to post an email address for readers to write responses. Almost immediately, I started to receive messages. In my desire to understand where the points of departure may be, I actually took the dangerous step of responding to all of these during the first week after publication. I posted here all of these correspondence threads. Except for withholding the last name and email address of each respondent, I present these to you unedited and in their entirety so that you could form your own impression of these people (and judge my personal reactions).
Most responses were from folks who are solidly pro-ID. Feel free to read the entire threads posted below, but after reading the first few lines, I think you will get the idea. To me, these individuals are so thoroughly brainwashed by the ID deceptions that they are no longer interested in facts. I should not have been surprised, since the ID movement has been devious enough to prevent their audience from checking their facts, by advocating a distrust of all scientists connected with evolutionary biology -- specifically by equating the word "atheist" with "Darwinist". Therefore I mainly got lectured using the usual ID rhetoric, most of which are citations and quotes that are totally out of context. (This "quote mining" tactic makes sense to me, because the rhetoric was composed mainly by lawyers, not scientists. Scientists are trained to make appropriate citations that will stand up to careful scrutiny; by contrast, quote mining could win over a jury in a courtroom if opposing counsel does not issue rebuttals to them. Fortunately, there is a nice online "fact check" resource, http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/ , with a thorough catalogue of rebuttals to all ID claims thus far.)
The respondents:
Lester V." (Daphne, AL) wrote an "open letter" to me, which among the responders provided the most thorough recitation of practically all claims and misquotes that the ID movement has ever been published. This was apparently a one-time lecture, as he never responded to my rather petulant rebuttal.
"Joseph U." actually wrote me from Canada, and "also lectured me at length, this time listing all the ID rhetoric that had been custom-made for Catholics, along wth the usual ID mantras. It's amazing how these folks think I would write this column without being aware of these arguments. Perhaps it is because that is how they went about their own rantings. Read on and see what I mean.
"James M." (Mobile, AL) just gave a short statement displaying his inability to understand simple English. How can any normal discussion even take place, when even the syntax is lost on your listener? This is something I had not expected.
"David C." (Mobile, AL) was even more exasperating in this regard. Not only was he mostly unresponsive to my statements; very often he did not seem to comprehend what it is I was saying. I often felt like I was writing to a deaf and blind person who thinks he could hear and see. Here is the thread of my correspondences with him.
"June S." (Mobile, AL) was probably the most polite of the negative respondents, but no matter how I explained to her how it may be possible to be a scientist who is also a believer, she was solidly convinced that I (and all scientists) were headed straight for eternal damnation. You can read a history of my correspondence with her.
It gets even better. This just in: a letter that got published on June 1 goes on to state that I represent a modern evil that has brought on sexual perversion and murdering the unborn. I posted it here. (I copied it directly from http://www.al.com/opinion/press-register/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1212311811303770.xml&coll=3 .)
There was one positive respondent, "Richard H.". One could only hope that he represents several others who simply did not feel the need to write me. Since he is a prof like me, I would have felt even better if I got such a message from a more lay person.
If you are interested, I have also posted the original, unedited version of this column, before about one third of it had been edited out. To read this version, click here. I'm not unhappy with their editing job as it still preserved all the main points and toned down the rhetoric a little.
I learned quite a bit from this experience, and I expect to learn more in the weeks and months ahead. The ID movement is a perfect fit for people who have suppressed the human instinct to learn new things. In the end, there really is no use trying to show them the facts, because they would not believe a fact even it bit them in the ass.
Therefore I decided to stop wasting any more time. For anyone else who might try to enlighten me about ID, I now have a form letter, which you can read here. You might like it because it lists a lot of useful links to resources that present a more objective and balanced view of the issue. It may also help reassure you that there are groups of hard-working and intelligent folks who are ready to help you if your school board is ever infiltrated by the ID cult.
So now I have decided to just let this all go; just tend to my own garden, and save my energy only for the day when ID proponents once summon up the gall to try and slither into my children's school district. Even then, I know I will not be alone, and in the end, no matter what I do, the ID cult will be selected for eventual extinction in the globalized real world, and truth will prevail.
When a retired electrician was allowed a pro-ID rant for an entire half-page in early May 2008, where he joyfully announced that our illustrious Alabama State Senate has passed a resolution recognizing "non-religious intelligent design" as a legitimate science -- and went on to call on Boards of Education to start considering the insertion of this "new" ID into the science classes -- I was so horrified that I could no longer stay silent. I submitted my own column, which was titled "Don't be distracted by 'intelligent design'" and published on the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, 2008.
To read my published column, click here.
All column submissions were required to post an email address for readers to write responses. Almost immediately, I started to receive messages. In my desire to understand where the points of departure may be, I actually took the dangerous step of responding to all of these during the first week after publication. I posted here all of these correspondence threads. Except for withholding the last name and email address of each respondent, I present these to you unedited and in their entirety so that you could form your own impression of these people (and judge my personal reactions).
Most responses were from folks who are solidly pro-ID. Feel free to read the entire threads posted below, but after reading the first few lines, I think you will get the idea. To me, these individuals are so thoroughly brainwashed by the ID deceptions that they are no longer interested in facts. I should not have been surprised, since the ID movement has been devious enough to prevent their audience from checking their facts, by advocating a distrust of all scientists connected with evolutionary biology -- specifically by equating the word "atheist" with "Darwinist". Therefore I mainly got lectured using the usual ID rhetoric, most of which are citations and quotes that are totally out of context. (This "quote mining" tactic makes sense to me, because the rhetoric was composed mainly by lawyers, not scientists. Scientists are trained to make appropriate citations that will stand up to careful scrutiny; by contrast, quote mining could win over a jury in a courtroom if opposing counsel does not issue rebuttals to them. Fortunately, there is a nice online "fact check" resource, http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/ , with a thorough catalogue of rebuttals to all ID claims thus far.)
The respondents:
Lester V." (Daphne, AL) wrote an "open letter" to me, which among the responders provided the most thorough recitation of practically all claims and misquotes that the ID movement has ever been published. This was apparently a one-time lecture, as he never responded to my rather petulant rebuttal.
"Joseph U." actually wrote me from Canada, and "also lectured me at length, this time listing all the ID rhetoric that had been custom-made for Catholics, along wth the usual ID mantras. It's amazing how these folks think I would write this column without being aware of these arguments. Perhaps it is because that is how they went about their own rantings. Read on and see what I mean.
"James M." (Mobile, AL) just gave a short statement displaying his inability to understand simple English. How can any normal discussion even take place, when even the syntax is lost on your listener? This is something I had not expected.
"David C." (Mobile, AL) was even more exasperating in this regard. Not only was he mostly unresponsive to my statements; very often he did not seem to comprehend what it is I was saying. I often felt like I was writing to a deaf and blind person who thinks he could hear and see. Here is the thread of my correspondences with him.
"June S." (Mobile, AL) was probably the most polite of the negative respondents, but no matter how I explained to her how it may be possible to be a scientist who is also a believer, she was solidly convinced that I (and all scientists) were headed straight for eternal damnation. You can read a history of my correspondence with her.
It gets even better. This just in: a letter that got published on June 1 goes on to state that I represent a modern evil that has brought on sexual perversion and murdering the unborn. I posted it here. (I copied it directly from http://www.al.com/opinion/press-register/index.ssf?/base/opinion/1212311811303770.xml&coll=3 .)
There was one positive respondent, "Richard H.". One could only hope that he represents several others who simply did not feel the need to write me. Since he is a prof like me, I would have felt even better if I got such a message from a more lay person.
If you are interested, I have also posted the original, unedited version of this column, before about one third of it had been edited out. To read this version, click here. I'm not unhappy with their editing job as it still preserved all the main points and toned down the rhetoric a little.
I learned quite a bit from this experience, and I expect to learn more in the weeks and months ahead. The ID movement is a perfect fit for people who have suppressed the human instinct to learn new things. In the end, there really is no use trying to show them the facts, because they would not believe a fact even it bit them in the ass.
Therefore I decided to stop wasting any more time. For anyone else who might try to enlighten me about ID, I now have a form letter, which you can read here. You might like it because it lists a lot of useful links to resources that present a more objective and balanced view of the issue. It may also help reassure you that there are groups of hard-working and intelligent folks who are ready to help you if your school board is ever infiltrated by the ID cult.
So now I have decided to just let this all go; just tend to my own garden, and save my energy only for the day when ID proponents once summon up the gall to try and slither into my children's school district. Even then, I know I will not be alone, and in the end, no matter what I do, the ID cult will be selected for eventual extinction in the globalized real world, and truth will prevail.
Responses to ID column: published letter to the editor
Can't lock up your faith
Dr. Albert Gapud's May 25 article, "Don't be distracted by intelligent design," speaks volumes for modern thinkers.
His comments seem to be written as a closure of further dialogue. He obviously is well-educated in science, which holds fast to the Darwin theory. He is a product of a scientific community over-exposed to evolution.
Intelligent design, which acknowledges either directly or indirectly that God created the world, must not be confined to churches and seminars. Faith cannot be placed in a box to be opened only on Sundays and at special times. Faith in God must permeate every facet of our lives.
About 10 to 12 years ago, while on vacation, my wife and I attended a church on Prince Edward Island, Canada. The preacher, priest or monk (I'm uncertain of his title) wore a burlap robe and openly criticized those "hillbillies" who live in the lower part of the United States for their simple belief in creation.
He said the Scopes trial settled the evolution question years ago. At the close of the service, I shook his hand at the church door and emphatically told him, "I am one of those Bible-believing, lower Alabama hillbillies you were talking about. I believe God created it all, as written in the book of Genesis."
He looked like he wanted to crawl away or run. But he had to face me for a moment, until I moved on out the door.
There are many questionable subjects that have been erroneously presented as fact. Creationists have been discredited and declared "politically incorrect" by colleges, where no discussion is allowed. It's "my way or the highway."
The "lock-box" technology has also been used to promote global warming, sexual perversion and the murder of innocent unborn children.
To allow evil to prevail, all we have to do is nothing.
JAMES J. KIRKSEY
Robertsdale
Dr. Albert Gapud's May 25 article, "Don't be distracted by intelligent design," speaks volumes for modern thinkers.
His comments seem to be written as a closure of further dialogue. He obviously is well-educated in science, which holds fast to the Darwin theory. He is a product of a scientific community over-exposed to evolution.
Intelligent design, which acknowledges either directly or indirectly that God created the world, must not be confined to churches and seminars. Faith cannot be placed in a box to be opened only on Sundays and at special times. Faith in God must permeate every facet of our lives.
About 10 to 12 years ago, while on vacation, my wife and I attended a church on Prince Edward Island, Canada. The preacher, priest or monk (I'm uncertain of his title) wore a burlap robe and openly criticized those "hillbillies" who live in the lower part of the United States for their simple belief in creation.
He said the Scopes trial settled the evolution question years ago. At the close of the service, I shook his hand at the church door and emphatically told him, "I am one of those Bible-believing, lower Alabama hillbillies you were talking about. I believe God created it all, as written in the book of Genesis."
He looked like he wanted to crawl away or run. But he had to face me for a moment, until I moved on out the door.
There are many questionable subjects that have been erroneously presented as fact. Creationists have been discredited and declared "politically incorrect" by colleges, where no discussion is allowed. It's "my way or the highway."
The "lock-box" technology has also been used to promote global warming, sexual perversion and the murder of innocent unborn children.
To allow evil to prevail, all we have to do is nothing.
JAMES J. KIRKSEY
Robertsdale
Responses to ID column: Richard H.
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 09:26:56 -0500
Subject: Your article on ID
Dear Dr. Gapud,
I simply wanted to congratulate you on a well-written and wonderfully reasoned article debunking the ID movement. Since moving my family to Mobile last year, I have been unpleasantly surprised as the level of ignorance, if not fanaticism, surrounding this topic.
Like yourself, I was raised Catholic and attended Catholic schools but, ironically, in my elementary and high school educational experience there was no mixing of science and religion. By contrast, I am very concerned about this trend in our educational system and society because there are historical precedents this this "hysteria," and none of them bode well for our future.
All the best in your efforts. If there is anything I can do to assist you in blunting this movement, please don't hesitate to ask.
Warmest regards,
Robert H., Ph.D. [Mobile]
[NOTE: Some personal correspondences followed, leading to a possible friendship.]
Subject: Your article on ID
Dear Dr. Gapud,
I simply wanted to congratulate you on a well-written and wonderfully reasoned article debunking the ID movement. Since moving my family to Mobile last year, I have been unpleasantly surprised as the level of ignorance, if not fanaticism, surrounding this topic.
Like yourself, I was raised Catholic and attended Catholic schools but, ironically, in my elementary and high school educational experience there was no mixing of science and religion. By contrast, I am very concerned about this trend in our educational system and society because there are historical precedents this this "hysteria," and none of them bode well for our future.
All the best in your efforts. If there is anything I can do to assist you in blunting this movement, please don't hesitate to ask.
Warmest regards,
Robert H., Ph.D. [Mobile]
[NOTE: Some personal correspondences followed, leading to a possible friendship.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
