-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
ScottL wrote:
Ben McIlwain wrote:
It would also be nice to get some Ptolemaist scholars to review our entries on gravitation and the solar system systematically; I suspect there's a lot of Galilean POV creep.
Seriously though, legitimate POV disputes are one thing ... but when one side has all of the science behind it and the other side has nothing behind it, giving equal weight is fallacious. Our articles on the shape of the Earth, global warming, what caused 9/11, and HIV causing AIDS are similarly reality-based.
I suspect his suggestion was review of what we say about them. A group so unpopular that they are characterized as they have been on this thread probably has some legitimate concerns about being misrepresented.
That's the problem with the whole "intelligent design" movement though: the entire point of their existence is misrepresentation. "Intelligent design" exists because "scientific creationism" was ruled unconstitutional in the late 1980's (as a public school subject, anyway). ID's mantra is basically, "We're not creationism, we're scientific" ... even though it's the same people, the same flawed arguments, and indeed, the same creationism. Obviously this simple truth must be in the article, but if you let the ID'ers go over the article and correct anything they feel is a "misrepresentation", you're basically enabling their agenda.
- -- Ben McIlwain ("Cyde Weys")
~ Sub veste quisque nudus est ~