From Leonard Krishtalka (July 19, 2011) at LJWORLD (Lawrence, Kansas), we hear the grim news, “Science takes a beating in early presidential campaign”: Referring to candidate Michelle Bachmann’s comments,
“I support intelligent design,” she said, reported CNN. “What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide.”
Krishtalka disagrees, saying,
… knowledge of evolution is an economic necessity. It underpins U.S. and global R&D on the production of the world’s food, fiber, fuel and pharmaceuticals.
How, exactly does it do that?, a friend of Uncommon Descent writes to ask: “Do you have a paper or quote that refutes the ‘teaching more evolution increases the state’s economy” myth?
Friend, it’s much harder to refute utter nonsense than to refute a viable but mistaken proposition. This, as it happens, is utter nonsense. Promotion of Darwinism has a purely negative impact on economic growth: Darwinism creates nothing except jobs for Darwinists, many of them funded by taxpayers who doubt the ideology. It’s no accident that Bachmann is a Tea Party favourite.
We would get the same impact from instituting court-ordered astrology classes. Given sociologist Steve Fuller’s view that Darwinism is indeed today’s astrology, we’d be on track. But one form of legislated nonsense on the curriculum is enough, surely.
See also: Darwinism is the astrology of science
Darwinism is in the same sort of mess that floored astrology