Saturday, January 22, 2005

Best response I have read to the Larry Summers Scandal

People weren’t irate because Summers presented a tentative hypothesis, but because Summers, an administrator with much clout in hiring and firing, presented a badly formed hypothesis with no evidence to support it, that contradicted what we know about the complexity of biology, and he misrepresented it as the result of current, “cutting-edge research.” This is exactly what we see from creationists, too. They will say that the idea that the earth is only 6,000 years old is simply a legitimate scientific hypothesis, supported by many top-notch researchers, and we’re violating the spirit of free inquiry by rejecting it. But it’s not. It’s been considered and rejected, and is an utterly ludicrous idea. And if the president of my university smugly spouted off such garbage, I’d be outraged and looking to see him fired too, as someone patently incompetent to lead a research university.


Post a Comment

<< Home