忘却からの帰還〜Intelligent Design

In January, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences weighed in on this debate, declaring that "[t]here is no scientific controversy about the basic facts of evolution,"1 because neo-Darwinism is "so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter"2 it. As an undergraduate and graduate student taking multiple courses covering evolutionary biology at the University of California San Diego, that is what I was told as well. My science courses rarely, if ever, allowed students to seriously entertain the possibility that Darwin's theory might be fundamentally flawed.

[ Casey Luskin: "Academic freedom and evolution" (2008/03/05) on San Diego Union-Tribune ]

The first part of the quote is from page 52, near the end of the book. Here it is in context:

第1の引用は、本の終わり近くの52ページで、コンテキストは以下のとおり：

1 There is no scientific controversy about the basic facts of evolution. In this sense the intelligent design movement's call to "teach the controversy" is unwarranted. Of course, there remain many interesting questions about evolution, such as the evolutionary origin of sex or different mechanisms of speciation, and discussion of these questions is fully warranted in science classes.

進化についての基本的事実についての科学的論争はない。この意味で、インテリジェントデザイン運動が「論争も教えろ」と要求するのは、裏付けがない。もちろん、性別の進化的起源や種形成の異なる多くのメカニズムなど、進化についての多くの興味深い問題は残されていて、これらの問題についての議論を理科の授業で扱うのは、正当な理由がある。

Where do you think we'll find the second half of his quote? Page 53, maybe? Page 54? No. You'll have to thumb backwards through the book, to a place near the beginning: page 16.

Luskinの第2の引用はどこにあると思うだろうか？　53ページかな？　54ページかな？　どっちも、はずれだ。本をめくって、始めの方の16ページだ：

2 Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the Sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics).

多くの科学理論は十分に確立されていて、実質的には新しい証拠によって覆りそうにない。たとえば、地球が太陽をめぐという太陽中心理論が間違っているとか、生物が細胞でできているという細胞理論が間違っているとか、物質が原子の化合物ではないとか、地球がプレートに分かれていて地質学的時間スケールで移動するというプレートテクトニクス理論が間違っているということを示す証拠が出てくることはないだろう。

[ PZ Myers: "Why do newspapers continue to publish Discovery Institute press releases?" (2008/03/09) on Pharyngula ]