Jan 1, 2008 - Yet another reason not to read The Telegraph Their science editor, Roger Highfield, is ignorant of science http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_14.html#highfield Aside from his moronic misrepresentation of scientists' arguments about a whole slew of matters from evolution to global warming, it's evident he doesn't even understand the import of the most elemental history of science: "Intelligent design is for cretins but, despite the endless proselytizing about the success of Darwin - assuming that evolution is a fact - I could still see it being superseded, rather as Einstein's ideas replaced Newton's law of gravity." Einstein's ideas did *not* "replace" Newton's. Einstein couldn't replace Newton, since astronomical calculations done using Newton's Laws had been exquisitely validated by observations for centuries. What Einstein did was to *extend* Newton's Laws to situations - high gravity, high speeds, large distances or times - at which they break down. The very first thing you do when you learn the General Theory of Relativity is to demonstrate that it yields Newton's Laws as a limit. (And, aside from Mercury, it's hard to even observe the effects of Einstein's relativity on the motions in the solar system.) It would be one thing if this claptrap came from on of their op-ed columnists (Viscount Monkcton of Brenchly, anyone?), but this guy is the science *editor* - the filter through which all science coverage in The Telegraph passes. One might expect that Science Editor should be a job for which the qualification would be at least a passing knowledge of elementary science, but evidently not at The Telegraph.