Well here is my stance on it. First off, I would like to state that I am a Assembly of God Christian. Ok, so anyways, my question is Can Intellegent Design be Considered a Science? It is used so much today by theists as a provable science but it is not! Intellegent Design requires the premonition of Faith and Impliance. It sets forth hypothesis' that are unprovable and untestable. Surely it could not be considered a science. It is a psuedo science. It is as scientific as Astrology.
well theres my arguement. So anybody would like to answer my question?
2007-05-10 08:14:33 · 16 answers · asked by Panda WafflesZilla 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
its not a question on whether or not God or Jesus exist. I'm simply trying to argue that Intellegent Design cannot be considered a science because it cannot be a testable. Kenneth Miller recently gave me new insight into this. Even though I am a christian, ID is simply ridiculous to be considered a science, a form or way of explanation.
2007-05-10 08:26:17 · update #1
I have read Case for Christ. or rather the first 3 chapters =(. I should have been done by now but I like the book really. Its just that some arguements seem to be pushing the question and some are kind of biased. but I still agree with a few arguement points.
2007-05-10 08:31:11 · update #2
No, it can't be considered a science. There is no proof. And there is no way to prove anything. You can't form a hypothesis and then prove it. It's a story. It's not science. End of.
2007-05-10 08:18:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Intelligent Design is a theory and belief, not a science. In fact, any teaching about the origins of the world is just a theory. Yet I certainly would not compare it to astrology!! Modern science is based upon what humans can now physically observe and verify. We have no "eyewitnesses" of how the world came into being, and no archaeological evidence of evolution. The "Big Bang" theory is even more physically unproven, yet students are presented this hypothesis as fact every day in public schools! One's belief of origin is something that everyone must decide for their own self, because humans have absolutely no evidence proving any theories. But as far as beliefs, Which would you rather believe...that a loving, intelligent, all-powerful, all-knowing Creator God hand-fashioned you....or that you are a random collection of molecules that formed by chance over millions of years? I highly recommend reading the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel.
2007-05-10 08:27:35 · answer #2 · answered by Lauren 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very good. However, ID is less scientific than astrology. At least astrology is based on astronomy, a science. ID is based not on science but on god, making it worse than nothing. It is a moronic attempt by religious weirdos to pretend that they know about science because their god is the one true god.
2007-05-10 08:33:12 · answer #3 · answered by Fred 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is current called "Intelligent Design" in no way qualifies as science. Irreducible Complexity is a scientific hypothesis, but has yet to be demonstrated for any biological system.
2007-05-10 08:20:43 · answer #4 · answered by novangelis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"One of the arguements for Intellegent Design is the mathematical impossibility of numerous amino acids forming into the elegant protein factorys we see in all life, right?" Not even that. Do a google search on "lock and key model" on enzymes. It speaks of quite the contrary. You might get something.
2016-05-19 23:16:33 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Correct: ID is not science at all. It doesn't even qualify as pseudo-science, really. It is an assertion based on religious belief--a severely literal religious belief. To call it anything else is to give it a dignity it does not have.
2007-05-10 08:18:04 · answer #6 · answered by Scott M 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Michael Behe (leading ID supporter) admitted under oath that according to his own arguments he would have to support Astrology being taught in public schools also.
2007-05-10 08:17:41 · answer #7 · answered by Eleventy 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No--it tries to prove an idea. Science attempts to explain things without bias.
2007-05-10 08:17:30 · answer #8 · answered by Paien 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I really just view it as a joke. I don't understand how it can be taken seriously never mind regarded as a science.
2007-05-10 08:18:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you; ID is not a science. It does not rely on testable, empirical evidence.
2007-05-10 08:18:40 · answer #10 · answered by Skepticat 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋