脳内変換：インテリジェントデザイン支持者は米国民の74%
wikipediaの記述ではインテリジェントデザイン支持は10%となっている。
According to a 2005 Harris poll, ten percent of adults in the United States view human beings as "so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them".[17]引用元のHarris pollの結果は次のようになっている。
2005年のHarris poll調査によれば、米国成人の10%が、人類が複雑すぎるので、パワーを持つフォースかインテリジェントな存在が創造を助けたことを支持している。
[17] Nearly Two-thirds of U.S. Adults Believe Human Beings Were Created by God The Harris Poll #52, July 6 2005.
[wikipdeia:Intelligent Design Retrieved on 2007/05/08]
TABLE 5 WHERE HUMANS COME FROMこれをLuskinは、「Human beings were created directly by God」もインテリジェントデザイン支持と解釈すべきで、従って74%がインテリジェントデザイン支持なのだと脳内変換した。
"Which of the following do you believe about how human beings came to be?"
Base: All Adults
June 2005
%
Human beings evolved from earlier species. 22
Human beings were created directly by God. 64
Human beings are so complex that they
required a powerful force or intelligent
being to help create them. 10
Not sure/Decline to answer 4
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=581
The Harris Poll does not present a single question that itself tests solely for support of intelligent design. The Harris Poll did find that only 10% of Americans agreed with the statement: “Human beings are so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them.” But it also found that 64% of Americans agreed that “Human beings were created directly by God.” People could only choose one of these. So guess what? If you believe that “Human beings were created directly by God” then you necessarily also believe that “Human beings are so complex that they required a powerful force or intelligent being to help create them.” The converse isn’t a true statement, but this means that in reality, at least 74% of Americans support the intelligent design viewpoint.この脳内変換はDiscovery InstituteのシニアフェローであるJay Wesley Richardsの「行間を読む」よりはましかもしれない。
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/05/wikipedia_intelligent_design_e.html
In reading all the buzz about the pope’s recent statements on the nature of science and religion (see "Pope says science too narrow to explain creation," Reuters, April 11 2007), I suspect there's a translation problem here. Reading between the lines, it looked like Benedict said some pretty strong things. Of course he's challenging scientism and calling for a broader concept of reason than is contained in experimental science. That's easy for classically informed philosophers to understand. But you can be sure that exactly 0% of reporters and 1% of readers will understand that.しかし、"モデルな理論"だと、"若い地球の創造論者"Dr. Carl Wielandと"古い地球の創造論者"Dr. Hugh Ross"から批判されている。
科学と宗教の性質についての教皇の最近の声明についてのすべての噂を読んでみて、翻訳の問題があるように思えてきた。行間を読むと、ベネディクトはもっと強いことを言っているようだ。もちろん、教皇は科学主義に疑問を呈していて、実験科学に含まれるものよりも広い論理概念を求めている。これは古典的な情報に通じた哲学者にとって理解することは容易だろう。しかし、記者の0%と読者の1%しか、これを理解できことは確かだ
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/04/pap_about_the_pope.html
==>忘却からの帰還:何にもないインテリジェントデザイン理論
仕様上は"若い地球の創造論"とも"古い地球の創造論"とも互換性を持つことになっているインテリジェントデザインだが、実態はそうなっていない。多くの世論調査で、45〜50%の米国人が「ヒトは神によって現在の姿で創造された」と答えている。この比率は過去四半世紀にわたってあまり変化していない。
にもかかわらず、「Human beings were created directly by God. 64%」も合算した数字74%を書けというCasey Luskinである。そのような修正をwikipdeia:Intelligent Designに対して行って、印象操作をしようとして、失敗したのだろうか？
定番な遠吠え
さらに、Casey Luskinは、"atheist"(無神論者)とか"activiest"(活動家)といった、おなじみの用語を並べる。
Wikipedia claims Discovery Institute’s poll is biased, but hypocritically cites a highly biased source to make that point: That reference given is an article printed in a plainly biased source, the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, whose co-founder, Paul Kurtz, is one of the leading atheist activists of the 20th and 21st centuries.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/05/wikipedia_intelligent_design_e.html
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District裁判の裁判官John E. Jones IIIに対しても、Discovery InstituteのJohn G Westなどが
"The Dover decision is an attempt by an activist federal judge to stop the spread of a scientific idea and even to prevent criticism of Darwinian evolution through government-imposed censorship rather than open debate, and it won't work," said Dr. John West, Associate Director of the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute, the nation's leading think tank researching the scientific theory known as intelligent design. “He has conflated Discovery Institute’s position with that of the Dover school board, and he totally misrepresents intelligent design and the motivations of the scientists who research it.”と攻撃したことがある。ただし、ルーテル教会信者で、共和党員で、ブッシュ大統領任命の連邦裁判官なJohn E. Jones IIIに対して、その攻撃はまったく通用せず、評判を落とすことには失敗している。
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/12/dover_intelligent_design_decis.html
"Activist"というのはDiscovery Instituteの定番な罵倒用語らしい。