The next thing that has to happen is to revise
this paragraph...
QUOTE(Paragraph in the Picard Bio)
Picard is one of the signatories of the Discovery Institute's "A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism", a controversial petition which the intelligent design movement uses to promote intelligent design by attempting to cast doubt on evolution.[21][22] Picard sees DNA as too complex to have originated through "purely random processes" and believes that it shows "the mark of intervention," and "a much greater mind, a much greater scientist, a much greater engineer behind who we are."[20] Though some of her beliefs are similar, Picard has expressed reservations about the intelligent design movement, saying that it deserves "much more" skepticism, and hasn't been adequately challenged by Christians and other people of faith. She argues that the media has created a false dilemma by dividing everyone into two groups, supporters of intelligent design or evolution. "To simply put most of us in one camp or the other does the whole state of knowledge a huge disservice," she said.[20]
The paragraph should be changed to read as follows...
QUOTE(Proposed Revision)
Picard is one of 103 scientists and academics who signed an untitled statement circulated in academia in 2001, which the Discovery Institute subsequently promoted as "A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism."[21][22] Picard sees DNA as too complex to have originated through "purely random processes" and believes that it shows "the mark of intervention," and "a much greater mind, a much greater scientist, a much greater engineer behind who we are."[20] Picard says that intelligent design deserves "much more" skepticism, and hasn't been adequately challenged by Christians and other people of faith. She observes that the media has created a false dilemma by dividing everyone into two groups, supporters of intelligent design or evolution. "To simply put most of us in one camp or the other does the whole state of knowledge a huge disservice," she said.[20]
I can provide the rationale to anyone here who requests it.
By the way, "the media" primarily refers to WP, as edited by the ethically challenged WikiClique on Intelligent Design.
Also, the comparable paragraph in the
James Tour BLP also needs to be revised. And there is no need for that ridiculous and misleading heading, either.
This post has been edited by Moulton: