Larry Moran — Will the real idiot please stand up?
|November 19, 2006||Posted by William Dembski under Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design|
Larry Moran has been getting some play on this blog, so I’ll throw in my two cents. I met Larry in 2002, when he attended a lecture I gave at U of Toronto and confidently explained to me and the audience how indirect Darwinian pathways explain the evolution of the flagellum from the type three secretory system. To this day it amazes me that people find so bogus an argument a slam dunk for evolutionary theory. Try explaining to an engineer that the origin of the laptop computer is the product of trial and error tinkering from a cathode ray tube. If anything, this analogy fails to capture the full measure of self-delusion that evolutionary theory has become.
Below is Larry’s recommendation on what to do with students who support ID. Let me suggest that it is an empirical question whether college students who support ID are smarter, dumber, or comparable to college students who support Larry’s brand of evolution — IQ tests, SAT and ACT tests, longitudinal studies of academic and life success, etc. can all be carried out on the two groups. I would venture that students who are ID supporters come out ahead (in part because they need to display the independence of spirit and intellect needed to face down bullies like Moran):
Flunk the IDiots
Casey Luskin over at the Discovery Institute reported that University of California, San Diego Forces All Freshmen To Attend Anti-ID Lecture. Apparently, the university has become alarmed at the stupidity of its freshman class and has offered remedial instruction for those who believe in Intelligent Design Creationism.
Salvador Cordova has picked up on this at Dembski’s blog, Uncommon Descent in an article titled “Darwinian indoctrination required at UCSD? Or will the other side be heard someday?”. He notes that 40% of the freshman class reject Darwinism.
I agree with the Dembski sycophants that UCSD should not have required their uneducated students to attend remedial classes. Instead, they should never have admitted them in the first place. Having made that mistake, it’s hopeless to expect that a single lectureÃ¢â‚¬â€even one by a distinguished scholar like Robert PennockÃ¢â‚¬â€will have any effect. The University should just flunk the lot of them and make room for smart students who have a chance of benefiting from a high quality education.