The Guardian (U.K.) plays an ingenious pro-evolution game in its online edition. Part one of the game is to publish a defense of Darwinian theory by James Randerson. Part two is to allow a brief counter-commentary defending intelligent design by Richard Buggs.
But then, part three, comes into play. After the Buggs piece, the Guardian publishes a long, long series of responses with almost all of them extremely antagonistic. Many are quite emotional, many mean-spirited and a couple are even longer than the Buggs column itself.
The end result of the game is that the reader is left with a distorted, derisive picture of intelligent design theory. In that neverending comment section, there's a lot of heat, a lot of illogical attacks, and a lot of hooting against minds darkened by religion...but very little rational, science-based argument.
And, of course, it is only in such an atmosphere that Darwinism can survive.
