I just got done listening to WTOP's Politics Program with Mark Plotkin, where Republican Lt. Governor candidate Bill Bolling was the guest. I won't review the entire program, just point out one answer Bolling gave, since it was so amazing! Asked whether he supported teaching evolution in the public schools, first Bolling tried to punt by saying it was a local decision. After that didn't work, Bolling came right out and stated that he favored teaching CREATIONISM side-by-side with evolution in science class. When the startled hosts asked him whether he didn't mean "intelligent design," Bolling responded that he saw creationism and intelligent design as the same thing. Well, at least he's right about that last statement. Anyway, for Bill Bolling's edification -- if that's possible -- here are the definitions of those three concepts.
1) Evolution: "In biology, evolution is the process by which populations of organisms acquire and pass on novel traits from generation to generation, affecting the overall makeup of the population and even leading to the emergence of new species. Evolution is what is known as a "scientific theory," which is NOT a "theory" in the same sense that is used popularly. Instead a "scientific theory" is "a model of the world (or some portion of it) from which falsifiable hypotheses can be generated and tested through controlled experiments, or be verified through empirical observation." Evolution happens to be "the most powerful theory explaining variation and speciation, and within the science of biology it has completely replaced earlier accepted explanations for the origin of species, including Lamarckism and creationism."
2) Intelligent Design: "...presented as an alternative to purely naturalistic forms of the theory of evolution. Its putative main purpose is to investigate whether or not the empirical evidence necessarily implies that life on Earth must have been designed by an intelligent agent or agents." It should be pointed out that the many critics of intelligent design call it "religious dogma repackaged in an effort to return creationism into public school science classrooms." Unfortunately, this movement is actually a serious poltical force in the United States in the early 21st century, despite the fact that it is not repeatable, observable, or falsifiable -- three essential ingredients for scientific inquiry.
3) Creationism: Also known as "creation theology," is the belief that " humans, life, the Earth, and the universe were created by a supreme being or deity's supernatural intervention." In addition, "creationism is most often used to describe the belief that creation occurred literally as described in the book of Genesis or the Qur'an, for Jews and Christians, and for Muslims, respectively." Interestingly, Newsweek reported in 1987 that, "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who ascribed to Biblically literal creationism." In other words, 1.5% of U.S. scientists agree with Bill Bolling. The other 98.5% disagree with him.
What's truly ironic here is that, right after the evolution question, Bolling was asked his views on stem cell research. Bolling said he SUPPORTED stem cell research, although not embryonic stem cell research. Well, excuse me, but isn't it true that what makes stem cells so powerful is their very ability to differentiate - aka, EVOLVE -- into specialized cell suchs as a heart, liver, or muscle cell? Hmmm...can we say, "unclear on the concept?"
The other issue here is more practical and immediate: does Bill Bolling want Virginia to be on the cutting edge of 21st century science, or does Bolling want to keep our students in ignorance of the most basic foundations behind biology? Unfortunately, it would appear to be the latter, given that giving equal time to creationism in science class would take valuable time away from teaching REAL science, not to mention mixing religion and state -- to the detriment of BOTH, I would point out, just as the Founding Fathers understood.
Speaking of Founding Fathers, here's what Thomas Jefferson - a truly great Virginian, unlike Bill Bolling! - had to say back in 1802 on the subject of church/state separation (emphasis added):
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.
To paraphrase Jerry Kilgore, "Bill Bolling, you're no Thomas Jefferson!" Apparently, Bolling's not a scientist, either. And he's certainly not qualified to be Lt. Governor of Virginia, that's for damn sure. Someone, please get this guy outta here. GONG!!!