Having the "argument from popular vote" blow up in your face.

(The first in a number of ID-related postings.)

One of the major right-wing arguments in favour of teaching Intelligent Design (or, as those of us with functioning brain stems like to call it, "Pig Ignorant Fundamentalist Swill") is that so many of the general public have said that that's what they want, as in here from back in 2002:

In fact, intelligent-design theorists have popular opinion on their side. Americans seem to overwhelmingly reject the Darwinian view of evolution, despite its scientific hegemony. According to a recent Gallup Poll, 45 percent of respondents said they believed in the biblical view that God "created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years."

An additional 37 percent believe that "humans have developed over millions of years from less-advanced forms of life, but God guided this process." A mere 12 percent believe that God has nothing to do with it.

You see, say the promoters of Pig Ignorant ... uh, Intelligent Design? The majority wants it and that should settle the issue. Sadly, there are two fundamental flaws with this argument.

The first is that scientific fact doesn't give a rat's behind about popular vote. Science is not a democracy and never has been. If you don't understand this, then think about applying the principle of majority rule to other aspects of nature.

The next time a hurricane is bearing down on the Gulf Coast, let the citizens hold a referendum and vote that the storm doesn't make landfall and plant their house somewhere in the middle of Lake Pontchartrain. I'm sure the storm will care about the result of that vote.

Let the public get together and vote that global warming doesn't exist or that the avian flu isn't a looming health hazard, and see just what difference that makes. Are you starting to get the point? Science is not a democracy and, more to the point, science doesn't care how breathtakingly stupid you are. Regardless of what you think, global warming is still happening, the avian flu is a potential disaster in the making and evolution happened. Deal with it. All of it. But that's not all.

For people who keep pushing the idea of a majority deciding what to teach in public school science classes, those same folks can be thoroughly hypocritical when they're on the wrong side of the vote. Like when the Discovery Institute (or, as we who understand science like to call it, "Anti-Intellectualls 'r' Us") brags about the growing collection of "scientists" who now support ID -- all 400+ of them:

More than 400 scientists have signed onto a growing list from all disciplines who are “skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”

Whoo hoo! 400+ "scientists". With more on the way, perhaps even dozens! But, gosh, I'm willing to bet that, if you were to hold a vote among mainstream, actual working and competent scientists in the community, you'd easily get, say, 4,000 signatures that feel exactly the opposite. Maybe even 40,000. Probably more.

So, using their own logic against them, one can dismiss the yapping of ID supporters by pointing out that, if they really want to put this to a vote, then the only vote that counts ends up with their being taken out the woodshed and thoroughly thrashed. Just the way it should be.