Re: Bill Buckingham testifies in Dover...

> As Michael Ruse himself puts in his
> latest book, (The Evolution-Creation Struggle, p. 200f): "This parade
> of
> successes [for evolutionary biology] is not intended to deny the large
> gaps
> in our knowledge of evolutionary mechanisms that remain." Many
> scientists
> sneer at Behe's reference to "gaps," but Ruse himself--the most
> influential
> witness at the Arkansas trial--makes reference to them here. Of
> course he
> goes right on to say that there is thus plenty of "unfinished business
> to
> keep researchers working away," and that's appropriate. But it is also
> appropriate to point out "large gaps" in our knowledge of mechanisms,
> precisely what Mike Behe said in court.

But, I would argue that ID proponents have contributed nothing new to
the discussion of current limitations in our understanding of
evolutionary mechanisms and history. In fact, their arguments (which
are often based on errors or misunderstandings of current evolutionary
models and evidence) actually divert attention away from the real open
scientific questions. The literature is filled with exciting and
contentious debates within evolutionary science. Many of these are not
accessible at the high school level, although some are. But, the
arguments put forth by the ID proponents will not inform students about
the nature of real current scientific debate, but mislead them.

Keith

Keith B. Miller
Research Assistant Professor
Dept of Geology, Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS 66506-3201
785-532-2250
http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/
Received on Mon Oct 31 00:15:17 2005