Eh... I think "pwned" is a bit of an overstatement. It's certainly nice to see someone publicly attacking ID in the manner that it deserves, but the method the guy chose to do that was to say, over and over, "it's bringing religion into science". Of course, this is true, but in doing so he gave little attention to other relevant points, which got maybe 20 seconds of coverage. In particular, the fact that ID makes no predictions and has no peer-reviewed articles supporting it would have, IMO, been much more effective lines to take, and the fact that the natural world does not look remotely as though it has been designed wasn't mentioned at all.
Obviously, this is irrelevant to anyone with a real grasp of the issue, who already knows that ID is complete bullshit. However, they don't need a guy on TV to tell them that; what's important is whether this is conveyed to people who don't already have a good grasp of the issue, and I think it would be very easy for them to come away feeling that it was the ID proponent who was being fair and open-minded, while the actual scientist was just being narrow-minded and attacking anything relating to religion. A broader explanation of ID's flaws could have prevented that.
"The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken.
"This was evil manifest."
- Terry "Not a fantasy author, honest" Goodkind, bringing unintentional comedy to a bookshop near you since 1994.
Problem is that Newsnight isn't long enough to really critique it properly. There needs to be a national debate and the science side needs to choose someone who is actually proficient at debating and knows the facts. Getting scientists on these shows is all well enough, but most of them clearly aren't used too debating.
Oh and this made me laugh
IDer "I understand you have a philosphical position..."
Scientist "No I don't, I have a scientific one!"
Member of the Unremarkables Just because you're god, it doesn't mean you can treat people that way : - My girlfriend Evil Brit Conspiracy - Insignificant guy
Dartzap wrote:Yeah, there really needs to be a series of shows debating this kinda stuff, preferably with Jeremy Paxman being the judge, of course
Technically this is what the Beeb is meant to be doing, doing stuff about today's culture and it's various problems.
What I love about Paxman is that even if he agrees with you he'll still hassle you to provide proof of it. Possibly the best journalist in UK today.
Member of the Unremarkables Just because you're god, it doesn't mean you can treat people that way : - My girlfriend Evil Brit Conspiracy - Insignificant guy
I think I could've argued better than the humanist guy, Paxman relayed the common distortions of theory and presumably expected the humanist guy to correct him, but he didn't to my satisfaction. I would've said that ID isn't a theory and nor is it explanatory in any way, it doesn't explain anything. Then I would've brought up how it just so happens that everyone that supports it is religious in some manner and that children aren't advanced enough to consider anything other than mainstream fact, then hammered home the point that if ID were all for scientific debate, then how come they don't submit articles for peer review in wider science? Why do they have to try and get it into gullible kids instead?
EBC|Fucking Metal|Artist|Androgynous Sexfiend|Gozer Kvltist|
Listen to my music! http://www.soundclick.com/nihilanth "America is, now, the most powerful and economically prosperous nation in the country." - Master of Ossus
