New York Times Should Screen "Privileged Planet" for Its Staff
Rob Crowther blogged earlier about the New York Times article on the upcoming screening of "Privileged Planet" at the Smithsonian. The Times article is pretty fair and balanced, but it starts off with a big blooper in the headline and first sentence:
Smithsonian to Screen a Movie That Makes a Case Against Evolution
Fossils at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History have been used to prove the theory of evolution. Next month the museum will play host to a film intended to undercut evolution.
In fact, Privileged Planet is not about biological evolution. It makes the case for intelligent design in the universe based on astronomy and cosmology. It doesn't deal at all with the Darwinian account of how life developed. So it's flat wrong to state that the movie "makes a case against evolution." A much more accurate headline would be: "Smithsonian to Screen a Movie That Makes a Case for Intelligent Design."
Although much of the public controversy over intelligent design has focused on the application of design to biology, it's important to remember that design theory itself reaches well beyond biology, and that some of the strongest evidence for design comes from such fields as physics, astronomy, and cosmology.