Let's de-emphasize Einstein instead

I got e-mailed this terrible article from the Chronicle of Higher Education. It covers some of the discussion from the AAAS meetings last week, where one of the themes was "de-emphasizing Darwin". Some of you may have been e-mailed this too. I think the most appropriate response is parody:

De-emphasizing Einstein Might Advance the Argument for Relativity, Physicist Says at Scientists' Meeting
In his controversial book, The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins insisted that scientists should work to dispel the idea that God exists. Without religion, Mr. Dawkins has said, the conflict between quantum physicists' beliefs about chance and the cryptoreligious belief that "God does not play dice" would vanish. Now an astrophysicist has proposed a different tack. In a meeting last weekend in San Francisco, he suggested scientists might win the argument by ditching Einstein.
"Astrophysics is a branch of natural science that is far beyond anything Einstein could have imagined," said the cosmologist, Rebus Antikythera, at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science on Friday.
Mr. Antikythera, a professor of cosmology and astrophysics at the University of Dornhelm in Germany, said scientists should emphasize that astrophysics is a fully formed field of biological study "built up by generations of non-dogmatic scientists." Terms like general relativity can make astrophysics seem like an ideology, rather than a focus of empirical work, he said.
Few think that Einstein himself is such a divisive figure. But at a session on growing anti-relativistic sentiment in Europe, scholars from both sides of the Atlantic agreed that scientists should change the way they present their views.
Pressure from religious groups to teach alternatives to general relativity, such as Ptolemaic epicycles, in science classes once seemed mostly an American problem, but that is no longer true.
In September a Ptolemism group called Truth in Motion mailed teaching packets that promote geocentric physics as an alternative to general relativity to every secondary school in Britain. In October, Dean Wormer, a member of the European Parliament from Poland who has a Ph.D. in planetary science, organized a workshop for other members of parliament called "Teaching Newtonian Theory in Europe: Is Your Child Being Indoctrinated in the Classroom?"
And a book called Physics - A Critical Textbook, which describes a version of geocentrism, has been published in Germany and has been translated into 10 European languages, Mr. Antikythera said.
The book presents the view that a creator made basic spheres of the universe: sublunary and superlunary, for example, and then harmonic vibrations from the crystal spheres caused slight scintillations in the position of fixed stars, causing the phenomenon of "parallax".
The belief in human uniqueness lies at the heart of the problem, said Don J. Fuller, a professor of integrative studies at Minnesota State University, in a separate briefing on scientific literacy. "As you begin to really unravel the mysteries of this world, the true understanding of the structure and nature of life will be a challenge. These issues come closer to people."
Antonia Rockelyn, an associate professor of systematic theology at the Lutheran School of Theology at Boston, agreed. "It is the dethronement of humans that is so scary," she said.
Ms. Rockelyn thinks that part of the solution is to bring God back into the classroom, just not in science classes. "Scientific literacy is very important, but we also need to raise religious literacy," she said. A broader understanding of religion, its historical background, and its role in cultures might lead to more reasoned views, she said. "The only religious education that most American children get is in their Sunday school, where some teachers presuppose a conflict that is not really there, that doesn't need to be there."
Including a scholarly approach to religion in public education might help in the United States particularly, said Stanislaw Brzezinski, a sociologist and philosopher of science, technology, and religion at Exeter University, in England. Where religion is woven into the fabric of society, he said, "there's less resentment, a sense of banging on the door to be let in."
So in March 2009, should we celebrate the 130th anniversary of Einstein's birth? That was the question posed by Adam Bluth, a neuroscientist and development manager for the Wellcome Trust, an independent charity in London that finances biomedical research. He is contemplating such a celebration for the trust. Mr. Fuller, of Minnesota State, replied that he doesn't think Einstein's birthday party should be canceled. "I think we should treat Einstein as the person who got the general relativity idea right."