Letter to the Editor: Phony science

To the Editor:

Andrew Rennekamp's opinion piece, ("Intelligent Debate," DP, 9/27/05) suffers from a fundamental flaw: it assumes that Intelligent Design has as much support as evolution, which is simply not the case.

Since I am prevented (although only by space) from fully expounding on the ridiculous nature of every argument in favor of ID, I will simply state that there is a reason that papers purportedly proving ID are never published in legitimate scientific journals, in which they would be subject to rigorous peer review, and are instead printed in publications funded by the Discovery Institute.

There is no substantive dialogue because one side is so clearly wrong. Proponents of Intelligent Design have put forth numerous arguments for their view over the years. Without exception, every single one has been disproved through logic, scientific findings or a combination of the two.

ID has so little going for it that scientists are perfectly justified in being outraged. They do not want to see scientific classrooms flooded with inane theories that are completely unsubstantiated. Just as principles of astrology should not be taught in an astronomy class, ID should not be taught in a classroom of science.

Peter Ostrovski

College '07

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.