Defining Science
The New York Times has claimed that the state of Kansas has redefined science. I hardly think so. Taken outside of the ID debate, if one were to walk up to most any scientist and ask him if the following is a good explanation of what science is, the vast majority would have no problem with it:
Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory-building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena.
What is it about the preceding definition that is offensive or lacking? Nothing, if you ask the other 40 states whose definition is essentially identical to that of Kansas (Nine states have no definition, at all). The definition scuttled by the state of Kansas was the only one which stated specifically that only natural explanations could be sought. The charge that Kansas is redefining science is blatantly false.
The definition recently adopted by the Kansas state board of education should be objectionable to no one. Science is about logically applying the scientific method to reach the best explanation of how things are. It is not about prejudging certain possible outcomes by excluding them from consideration from the beginning.
Those who claim ID will destroy science and make Americans scientifically illiterate will have a hard time convincing most folks based on the above definition. Allowing the possibility of intelligent design does not change the way science is done. Scientists do not clean out their labs and pack up their belongings and become theologians. They continue doing science, testing all theories and hypotheses, not willing to state as fact what they cannot support with verifiable evidence, and not willing to insist that evidence must conform to a certain philosophical viewpoint (i.e. naturalism). For a list of the various state definitions, see here.