Would you please help me bombard the NYT with letters reminding them that so-called "intelligent design" is not a theory?
Yet another NYT article refers to ID as a theory, three times:
Frist Urges 2 Teachings on Life Origin
he said that the theory of intelligent design as well as evolution should be taught in public schools
The theory of intelligent design holds that life is too complicated to have developed through...
Critics say intelligent design theorists are trying to supplant science with religious beliefs.
A THEORY MUST BE THOROUGHLY SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ID, THEREFORE IT IS CONJECTURE. (Goddamnit, they piss me off.)
Please join me in writing to them at letters@nytimes.com.
Those bastards consistently repeat Republican talking points. A recent article about intact dilation and extraction referred to the procedure by this term only once, to mention that it's the medical term, but as "partial birth abortion" eight times, title included. Coincidence?
GGGGRRRRRRRR!!!!
Please, please write to them. If enough of us take action, hopefully they'll start to notice.