Evolution vs. Creation = Democrat vs. Republican?
Paul Krugman writes that as Republicans become more contemptuous of free thinkers, it's only natural that scientists and academics will become more drawn to the Democratic Party. There certainly are many Republicans who believe in evolution and many Democrats who believe in creation, but there's definitely something to what Krugman says.
He references a Scientific American April Fool's Day gag in which they say they've given up in the battle for Darwinism. It doesn't appear on the magazine's Web site, but I have an excerpt below, and the whole thing is available here. (You might have to scroll down.)
In retrospect, this magazine's coverage of socalled evolution has been hideously one-sided. For decades, we published articles in every issue that endorsed the ideas of Charles Darwin and his cronies. True, the theory of common descent through natural selection has been called the unifying concept for all of biology and one of the greatest scientific ideas of all time, but that was no excuse to be fanatics about it.
Where were the answering articles presenting the powerful case for scientific creationism? Why were we so unwilling to suggest that dinosaurs lived 6,000 years ago or that a cataclysmic flood carved the Grand Canyon? Blame the scientists. They dazzled us with their fancy fossils, their radiocarbon dating and their tens of thousands of peer-reviewed journal articles. As editors, we had no business being persuaded by mountains of evidence.