Sitting on the Fence

An acquaintance used the following aphorism, if you will, pretty often: If you sit on the fence for too long, sooner or later it's bound to poke your butt. Apparently, if you can coin a cool-sounding name for "sitting on the fence" it doesn't hurt as much. I had heard of the intelligent design theory earlier (cool word, teleology, boggles people enough to allow one to sit on the fence for a while longer without being heckled) but started paying attention to it only last week when the debate heated up.

Granted that evolution has taken us a long way in a relatively short span of time and that gives us more reasons to believe that there was a catalyst somewhere in the process, should we scientists be open to the fact that the catalyst in question was something "pseudo-scientific" like intelligent design or one of Erich von Daniken's more 'interesting' theories? Or should we only confine ourselves to the mainstream? Does there really exist a line between science and psuedo-science? After all, several theories that were once regarded as "too far out" have been subsequently proved scientifically.

Oh, I wish I knew what Darwin was thinking now.

But, in the meanwhile, and on a much lighter note, here's what I'm thinking of.