The vast majority of scientists would still, in that case, have nothing to be ashamed of. Evolution is absolutely the best conclusion<\/a> one can draw on the basis of the evidence currently available. There is, at present, no viable scientific alternative, despite what some claim. There is no shame in working with the best available understanding, nor in overturning that understanding in light of new, unexpected discoveries.<\/p>\n The YECs and cdesign proponentsists, on the other hand, should be ashamed even if they turned out to be right. Because in the realm of science, and in the realm of honest discourse in general, it isn\u2019t whether your opinion or conviction happens to be right. It is how<\/em> you reached your conclusion that matters. If someone picks a view of the universe because it makes them feel good, and doesn\u2019t care about the evidence<\/a>, the fact that they happened to pick the one that was right doesn\u2019t mean for a moment that they made an intelligent, honest, careful, well thought out choice. The ID and YEC proponents have engaged in trickery and deceit<\/a>, sleight of hand<\/a> and misrepresentation of the facts. These things are utterly shameful behavior, even in the service of a viewpoint that happens to be correct.<\/p>\n Lest I be misunderstood, in view of the overwhelming evidence (which young-earth deceptionists and cdesign proponentsists dishonestly say doesn\u2019t exist or isn\u2019t persuasive) it is becoming increasingly improbable that the above scenario could ever actually happen. But science is always open ended \u2013 and that is the point. Creationists of the sorts mentioned in this post are not doing science, because they know the conclusions they want to draw and will let no evidence or logic prevent them from doing so.<\/p>\n When it comes to science, however, and when it comes to honesty, it isn\u2019t whether you win or lose that matters. It is how you play the game.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s apply the same thing to the \u201cculture war\u201d surrounding this subject \u2013 the battle for dominance not in terms of the scientific consensus but in terms of influencing the public. Could intelligent design\u2019s vocal advocates potentially persuade a majority of people in this country or even the world? It is certainly possible. But I ask those Christians who have listened only to that side and have accepted it because they want <\/em>it to be true: Are you really committed to \u201cwinning\u201d at any cost? If honesty and \u201cfair play\u201d are sacrificed, can it really be called a victory?<\/p>\n Let\u2019s imagine a hypothetical (and admittedly implausible) scenario, in which some new information comes to light \u2013 whether through scientific investigation, or from a booming voice from a burning bush \u2013 showing that in fact the intelligent design crowd, or even the young-earth creationists, were right, and it turns out that evolution is utterly inadequate […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":136,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3849","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/tracker\/7622297540113836091-7311056788852292924?l=exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com\")