2007-04-01 03:48:09 · 9 answers · asked by burlingtony 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Other - Science
I feel the truth lies somewhere between these two or even beyond and we will know it at the right time.
2007-04-01 04:39:48 · answer #1 · answered by Swamy 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No question: evolution.
Intelligent design isn't much of an explanation (much less a *scientific* one).
An explanation is a description of something complex in terms of something simpler.
Intelligent design is the opposite. It takes *all* complex things and describes them in terms of something far more complex than all of them combined!
This is one thing that people don't understand about intelligent design, or creationism. They look at the something like the eye, and say that the evolutionary theory of sucessive improvements is a complex theory ... and that "it was designed by an intelligent designer" is a simpler explanation.
But all it does is replace the *eye* as the thing that needs explaining, with the *intelligent designer*.
How does this intelligent designer work? What mechanism does he use? What are his motives? (The question of motive is introduced by the word 'intelligence'.) How does he violate laws of nature that we can observe? Is he a 'he' at all? Could the intelligent designer be a 'she', or an 'it'? Etc. etc.
In short, Intelligent Design, doesn't actually EXPLAIN anything.
The next time you talk to an intelligent design advocate, notice that most of their arguments are *against* evolution, not *for* intelligent design. As they talk about the eye, or the flagellum, or some other structure and try to poke (nonexistent) holes in evolution ... ask them how intelligent design "explains" the eye or the flagellum.
The answer will be simply "the designer designed it" which is an absolutely EMPTY "explanation."
2007-04-01 11:51:42 · answer #2 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Evolution implies randomly-driven "adaptation" of species, with the "most-fit" adaptations being perpetuated because they confer a benefit on those members of a species.
"Intelligent Design" infers a designer.
If evolution is true, one would expect to see "imperfections" in species that did not cause problems for those species. (Like male mammals having nipples, for example)
If "intelligent Design" is true, and you still observe such imperfections, the logical conclusion is that the "designer" made some hilarious mistakes.
Your choice:
No designer,
a designer who designed evolution,
or a designer who didn't know what He was doing....
2007-04-01 11:01:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I go with intelligent design. Many scientist, upon truly studying what we have to go with have come to believe in a higher power of creation. Though it may not be the God of the Bible, they at least feel there is more than Evolution.
But, people will tend to read and believe only what reinforces their beliefs and not the fact I just mentioned.
One on the questions I find interesting of those who believe in evolution is; "Who created God"?
But, what is real interesting is when they are confronted with a similar question; "How did matter or stellar gases come to be"? I have heard many say; "It has always been", Oooo-K, Sounds like something I have heard before about God.
So, here we stand with no real proof of either, only what we feel in our Hearts.
God has shown Himself to me in a personal relationship, which I admit has not always been fun. So, I will keep believing in Him and Christ Jesus.
It do respect the beliefs of every person (Religious/Evolutionist) as that is their choice. I not look down on someone who believes different than me. Think how boring life would be if we all thought the same. We would dress the same, eat the same, where our hair the same etc.
2007-04-01 11:10:06 · answer #4 · answered by Snaglefritz 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Both, in the sense that the theory evolution is sufficient to explain the emergence of intelligent designs. I don't see the need to bring "God" into it. There may be a "God", but the more simple theory of evolution is sufficient, so it seems overly extravagant to rely on more complicated ideas.
2007-04-01 13:06:26 · answer #5 · answered by Adam B 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, I would hardly call intelligent design an explanation, it just fails to fit the facts so much it's mostly just an excuse. It is virtually certain that evolution works and did happen.
2007-04-01 10:51:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
No, scientists are NOT leaning towards creationism. No intelligent scientist, anyway. Pretty much all of us can tell science from non-science, and 'evolution is wrong but I can't think of why and I also can't think of a better explanation so god did it' isn't science.
2007-04-01 12:16:08 · answer #7 · answered by eri 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Your question is misleading. Why are they mutually exclusive?
Is God so impotent that he couldn't use evolution to create us? His intelligent design is evident in the very fabric of the physical laws and properties of the elements.
2007-04-01 12:21:09 · answer #8 · answered by arbiter007 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Given that ID was disproven, thrown out by the American leagl system and is worthless for all practical biology.
Evolution every time.
2007-04-01 10:59:51 · answer #9 · answered by Red P 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋