What a difference 4 days make

Remember the 'famous' DI 400 scientists? It took about
4 years to collect the names of 400 scientists
critical of Darwinian theory (never mind the poorly
worded statement).

So what could one do in 4 days?

http://shovelbums.org/content/view/155/526/

THOUSANDS OF SCIENTISTS SIGN PETITION
OPPOSING THE TEACHING OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN AS SCIENCE

No Debate Among Scientists Regardless of Faith,
Intelligent Design Is Not Science.

Archaeologist R. Joe Brandon has organized a massive
four-day online campaign in the scientific community
in response to the Discovery Institute’s ongoing
efforts to include Intelligent Design content in
public school science classes. The petition, at
www.ShovelBums.org, was circulated between September
28th and October 1st to scientists trained in
evolutionary theory and gave them an opportunity to
publicly state that Intelligent Design should not be
taught in public schools within the science
curriculum. The results were overwhelming—7,733
signatories, more than half of whom are scientists
with Ph.Ds. “I organized this project as a response
to the Discovery Institute's four-year petition
initiative which gathered only 400 scientist
signatures opposing evolution and promoting
Intelligent Design as a scientific theory,” said
Brandon. “During my short, four-day experiment, I
received about 20 times as many signatures at a rate
that was orders of magnitude higher than what
Discovery Institute can claim.”

Of course, science is not done by numbers but with the
DI making much of 'increasing controversy' and
'increasing support for ID', it's time to expose the
reality.

More good news from 'Down Under'

 A COALITION of more than 70,000 Australian scientists
and science educators has condemned the teaching in
science classes of "intelligent design" - a
creationist-like theory of the origin of life.

In an open letter published today in major newspapers,
including The Australian, the group says it is
"gravely concerned" that intelligent design is being
taught in schools as an alternative to evolution.

"It's important scientists take a stand on this
because intelligent design is nothing more than
creationism dressed up in a tuxedo," says Mike Archer,
dean of science at the University of NSW and the
driving force behind the letter. "It's the same
mishmash of theology and science."

The letter urges governments and educators to oppose
the teaching of intelligent design in the nation's
science classes.

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2005/s1487354.htm
Received on Thu Oct 20 22:41:18 2005