Ad vericundiam, in action

August 7th, 2006 Black Ops Posted in Commentary, News |

WE TRUST THAT OUR READERS are familiar with the basic informal logical fallacies. Our occasional favorite is the argument ad verecundiam, or as it’s often translated, the appeal to authority. This is, of course, not an entirely correct rendering of the fallacy — a more correct label would be the appeal to inappropriate authority.

Comes now before us one Sandra Gade, formerly of the Physics department at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh (b’gosh), and her rather silly petition drive:

Oshkosh could become the next battleground over how evolution is presented to students in public school science classrooms.

Sandra Gade, a retired physics professor from the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, is leading a petition drive to ask the school board for an advisory referendum calling for Oshkosh public school teachers to present evidence for and against the theory of evolution in science classes.

Gade said she does not know how many signatures she has collected yet for the petition.

Once she is done petitioning in early September, she said she will present them “to somebody.” School district and state education officials say there is no mechanism in Wisconsin law to allow a school district to do an advisory referendum on a curriculum issue.

(more)

Sure enough, you can leave raspberries here. We’d discuss the good doctor’s position more, but frankly, it’s the same silly creationist canards that you can find anywhere, which we find rather boring these days. We were unable to spot any “argument” there that hasn’t already been convincingly euthanized elsewhere. So rather than reinvent the wheel yet again, let us look again at the doctor herself.

It is worth noting, perhaps, that a doctorate in physics does not make one an expert in evolutionary biology, paleontology, anthropology, geology, biochemistry, or any of the host of disciplines that lend support to the theory of evolution. While physics is a fine and demanding field in its own right, full of bold thinkers and clever theoreticians, the simple fact of the matter is that physics is barely implicated in the theory of evolution.

Asking a physicist about the theory of evolution is rather akin to asking a computer programmer about the details of neurosurgery, or the neurosurgeon about the details of electrical wiring codes, or the electrician about the details of programming computers — no matter how good they are in their own respective fields, you’re asking them about something that’s beyond their field of expertise, rendering their opinions something less than authoritative.

And so it is with Doctor Gade. She is, or was, a scientist. She is also entirely the wrong sort of scientist to produce an expert opinion on any aspect of the theory of evolution. Thus, her opinions on the subject of evolution are no more informed or substantial than any other layman’s opinions on evolution, for that’s what she is in this field — a layman. The butcher, the baker, and the candlestick-maker all have equally weighty opinions when it comes to evolution. Perhaps even weightier, since, judging by the pile Doctor Gade has produced to discount the theory of evolution, she is substantially less informed than most.

So, given that her petition consists of precious little more than one blind man calling for other blind men to rally under his banner, we are rather interested to see the results when she presents it “to somebody”. We understand the usual treatment for such offal is to put it in a flaming paper bag and deposit it on someone’s front porch in the dead of night. We approve.