by PhilipJ on 22 October 2005
This week’s What’s New has picked a winner from their question last week as to what should be asked of all future Supreme Court nominees. The winner?
How does being descended from a monkey affect your judicial philosophy?” – from Abi Soffer at SLAC.
The hardcore biologists in the audience are of course cringing – we aren’t descendents of monkeys, monkeys are more like our evolutionary brothers! Because of this (though I still think it is a fine question), I think I prefer Bob’s own:
Good stuff. In other What’s New news, the trial in Dover, PA has brought about an interesting revelation. According to
creationist intelligent design proponent Michael Behe, our current definition of “science” as given in the Oxford English Dictionary is too limiting, but then acknowledged that `scientific theory’ by his definition would fit astrology as well as intelligent design.”
Doesn’t sound like a very good definition to me.