"Journalists would do well to print Judge Jones's decision out and read it carefully. It's not up to a journalist to decide which side is right in a genuine scientific controversy. But it's wrong to let people use an article as a soapbox where they can make grand pronouncements about science, without looking into whether the science actually backs them up. Judge Jones fact-checked intelligent design and found it wanting. He did not shy away from this realization with worries that he was somehow being one-sided. Justice holds a balance in her hand, but balance is not what she seeks. Instead, she weighs the evidence to see which way it tips."I am responsible for typing the last two sentences in bold. I just like them a lot.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Judge John E. Jones III finally has a decision in the Pennsylvania creationism trial. How refreshing is to see a judge (and not any judge, but a conservative Republican appointed by George W. Bush) not falling into the trap of 'equal time' and 'balanced judgment' (see for example this story). He is simply extremely clear that intelligent design is not science, regardless of how hard some people try to masquerade it like that. Of course, I cannot be as eloquent as Carl Zimmer is: