Staff reporter Ron Grossman’s “ID dilutes the drive to discover, invent” (Perspective, Nov. 27) argues against teaching intelligent design because it will dilute the drive to discover and turn students from science. His arguments are clear, concise–and clearly diluted with absurd statements.
We are seeing more foreign-born graduate science students at our universities because they are the best-funded laboratories in the world. Wouldn’t you expect these labs to take the best students rather than just pick U.S students?
Grossman claims that intelligent design “takes away the sense of puzzlement that inspires humans to create, discover and invent.” I think humans are inspired to find the truth. Whether this is due to random chance or an intelligent designer is not relevant. From the flight of a humming bird to a beating heart, humans what to understand why things work. They want to know how to make things better, quicker or faster. And above all they want to be an intelligent designer.
Some of our greatest scientists were religious men who believed in an intelligent creator and yet Grossman brushes them aside. For some reason those who disagree with the establishment are badmouths. When journalists disagree with the establishment, are they badmouths?
Humans actually work harder when there are controversies. For example, some of the greatest advances in physics occurred when one group believed in quantum mechanics and the other did not. Let intelligent design be judged on scientific merit. Teaching intelligent design should not be feared if evolutionary theories are sound. Do not base this debate on diluted arguments.
