Pinker is spinning the story. 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.
Neurological differenes correlated with sex::Earth 6,000 years old
Steven Pinker::Scientists who support Young Earth Creationism
Do these analogies compute?
Posted by razib at
01:20 PM