The "Intelligent Design" Back Pedal

Sometimes I get the feeling that things in England are about two years behind the curve. This feeling was reinforced recently by Melanie Phillips, an writer for Spectator Magazine , as she belatedly tried to consider and defend the concept of Intelligent Design.

Her initial article provoked an immediate and warranted response from people who are actually up to date on this particular issue. Let's just repeat the basic response to her article:

Intelligent Design is not science but simply a re-branding of Creationism by Christian followers working to insert religion into public schools.

For those who are unsure about this particular response I would offer the following documentary by PBS:

Judgment Day: Intelligent Design On Trial

"Judgment Day captures on film a landmark court case with a powerful scientific message at its core," says Paula Apsell, NOVA's Senior Executive Producer. "Evolution is one of the most essential yet, for many people, least understood of all scientific theories, the foundation of biological science. We felt it was important for NOVA to do this program to heighten the public understanding of what constitutes science and what does not, and therefore, what is acceptable for inclusion in the science curriculum in our public schools."

Her answer to the criticism is a partial back pedal which has been covered beautifully by Jerry Coyne here:

Poor beleaguered Melanie Phillips

"She mentions Michael Behe as one of the scientific IDers, asserting that “He is not a Creationist.” Does she know that he once said that new species were “poofed” into being by the designer? If that ain’t creationism, I don’t know what is."

Educating herself on this issue rather than penning another article demonstrating her lack of knowledge on this particular topic would be much more rewarding.

Big ups to Charles Johnson over at Little Green Footballs for the link to Coyne's article and for fighting the good fight.