Peek-a-boo creationism In a triumphant hurry to discredit the liberal (read non-scientific) press, John West on FoxNews.com sticks both his feet headlong into his mouth as he tries to explain why we should go to bat for some idiot educators who want to reintroduce creationism into the school curriculum.

On Sept. 26 the Cobb County school board unanimously approved a policy encouraging teachers to discuss "disputed views" about evolution as part of a "balanced education." Critics of the policy are already crying foul, asserting that the policy is a thinly-disguised attempt to smuggle the Bible into science class. ... The only problem with this contention was that the school board explicitly said the opposite-- but the media didn't bother to report that fact! "We expect teachers to continue to teach the theory of evolution," said school board chair Curtis Johnston at the meeting during which the policy was adopted. "We do not expect teachers to teach creationism... Religion has no place in science instruction."

You might think West is on to something, but this snarky little commentator is not finished leading you down his devious little garden path. He first enlists the aid of local scientists who, believe it or not, have something new to replace Darwinism.. Argumentum ad novitatem piled high on top of a thin layer Argumentum ad verecundiam..? (yes I can mangle Latin with the best of them) West then proceeds to very carefully sets up a straw-man, by phrasing this as a science vs. religion debate, and then pulls a rabbit out of his hat to prove that it isn't. It's all about scientific dogma, that is just as bad as religous dogma..! see..? You know where this article is headed, don't you. In case you didn't, here's the suspenseful giveaway. I have to admit I read until the very end and if I didn't know any better, would have easily been fooled..

Today, growing numbers of scientists are raising serious questions about Darwinian theory. Some of them, like biochemist Michael Behe of Lehigh University and mathematician William Dembski of Baylor University, are proposing a "scientific" "alternative" to Darwinism known as intelligent design. Other scientists are simply pointing out that the underlying "evidence" for Darwinian "theory" is a lot more "complicated"--and "controverted"--than is usually presented to students. (emphasis and scare quotes all mine, I'm afraid)

Someone should send West to remedial Philosophy 101, failing which, he should at least be forced to re-examine the argument by design fallacy. UPDATE: Oh, did some digging into the Discovery Institute, and understood where West was coming from. It just happens to be the hotbed of ID panjandrums looking to, er, rule the world or something