Intelligent Design Creationism. Brilliant or ********?

Question

Also, do you think it should be taught in schools?

If you do think it should be taught in schools, do you think it should be taught in science class?

Answer 1

One can believe whatever one wants, but Intelligent Design is NOT science and should not be taught in schools. It is religious doctrine.

And if anyone says "Evolution is just a theory", they only prove their ignorance of science.

Here is what a theory is in scientific terms:
"A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory. Commonly, a large number of more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a general rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory."

See these key words: evidence, predictive, logical, and testable. That's science. You can't do any of those things with intelligent design. One of it's leading purveyors said it's based on inferrential evidence: "If I see handwriting on the beach, I can infer someone wrote it. Thus, if I see something so extraordinary as flagella on a cell, and have no other explanation, I can infer it was created by a higher power." Well, no you can't. That's not how science works when it comes to real questions.

Believe it in church, but don't try to teach in schools.

Answer 2

School kids should be taught to consider many differing points of view. By completely denying creationism, you are breaching the so-called separation of church & state just as if you taught it alone as irrefutable fact.
Look at the "evidence" supporting evolution. Most of the fossile and skeletal evidence still shown in text books is no more than speculation or outright fraud. Take an old monkey bone and mold it into a clay skull and call it early man. Thats BS.
Teach both as theory, or teach neither.

Answer 3

Put simply Intelligent Design/Creationism has no place in scientific textbooks because it has no explanatory value. You can sum up the crux of Intelligent Design/Creationism with the assumption that if some phenomenon cannot be explained, say irreducible complexity, then they chalk it up to God. That isn't a scientific manner for explaining anything. In fact it is not an explanation at all because you are using a mystery (God) to explain another mystery. It is as David Brooks stated: "To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy."

Answer 4

Intelligent design is brilliant. It creates a bridge between creationism and evolution.

Depends on how it is taught.

Teaching people that creationisma and evolution are not mutually exclusive is a good thing. I wonder what the teaching really entail, can't be all good.

Answer 5

All should be taught as theory as evolution is just a theory, teach both theories and let the people decide what they wish to believe. The problem is the people who do not wish to believe in a God wish their theory to be taught as truth.
They do not understand that no matter how many do are do not believe in God has no effect on weather there is or is not a God. What is clear is the people who do not believe in God are worse about trying to control your mind then the people who do believe in a God.

Answer 6

the variety of non secular concept is by using human imperfection that originated whilst the 1st guy & lady grew to become their lower back on their writer & desperate that they could make their very own judgements & rules. regrettably, it fairly is why we improve previous, go through & die. in simple terms as a results of fact religions can not agree on a thank you to maintain on with a writer's regulations, this would not disprove that there is a writer. he's in simple terms badly misrepresented via fake non secular recommendations - it fairly is all And as for biology figuring out that we are heavily concerning chimps... that's in elementary terms a fact. Biologists are in simple terms imperfect men/women who brush aside the belief of a writer earlier they initiate examining evidence .... so who's close-minded? there is an countless quantity of evidence that dinosaurs have been on earth so why isn't there a substantial quantity of fossil evidence to tutor one element evolving into yet another? version of a creature isn't evidence of evolution. edit to Chris above: I on no account badmouth anybody. basically, many biologists are believers in God. Micro-biologists too. they are actually not all atheists. Many have come to grasp that we would desire to have been designed. so a great way as you putting forward the T-Rex... as I reported earlier, version isn't evidence of evolution. It nevertheless remained a T-Rex no rely how long its legs have been or how lots they replaced. after all, we've not considered any fossil evidence that shows it replaced from a T-Rex have we?

Answer 7

Answers are seldom easily one side of the pole or the other. Evolution seems to me an excellent argument for intelligent design. Why should the ideas be considered mutually exclusive?

Answer 8

if we are to teach creationism it is only fair to teach all views. the Buddhists believe the earth came from an egg. i don't think it should be taught because other religions are not represented and more importantly it is not scientifically based

Answer 9

Bullsh.
Yes, it should be taught in schools -- as an example of what's not a scientific theory.

Answer 10

Paul Foster up there said it best... "I agree in it. Evolution happened hands down, and God played a huge role in it."