Thread: Teaching Intelligent Design

Originally Posted by Hoplite

Unfortunately, the Intelligent Design movement (which is basically repackaged Creationism) has been somewhat successful in more rural areas of the US in getting the concept of ID introduced to primary education.

I don't even worry about this anymore. Whenever these ID movements get even the slightest bit of attention, they're smacked down so badly for the religious movement they are and evolution goes on being taught as usual. As it should be.

And I'll be the first to say it, anyone who thinks Intelligent Design is anywhere near as valid as the Theory of Evolution got a pretty bad science education. There's no other way around it. Yes, I'll give a pass to those who think "God set evolution in motion", but that's not Intelligent Design.

Originally Posted by darth omar

Mendelian genetics and animal breeding are the cornerstones of agriculture. Darwinian evolution, not so much.

Mendel just documented existing processes for the first time.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

I don't even worry about this anymore. Whenever these ID movements get even the slightest bit of attention, they're smacked down so badly for the religious movement they are and evolution goes on being taught as usual. As it should be.

And I'll be the first to say it, anyone who thinks Intelligent Design is anywhere near as valid as the Theory of Evolution got a pretty bad science education. There's no other way around it. Yes, I'll give a pass to those who think "God set evolution in motion", but that's not Intelligent Design.

It's often said that ID is religion. I can accept that it comprises unscientific philosophy [by the identical measure, so does abiogenesis, but it's still taught as 'science' in public schools] but I don't get the religion angle.

There is nothing in ID which excludes an alien intelligence; indeed, it is for precisely this reason that biblical young earth creationists reject intelligent design.

Maybe you can explain that.

Originally Posted by Commodore

Mendel just documented existing processes for the first time.

Indeed. And he practiced some excellent science in doing it. No one doubts the work of Mendel; in contrast, people still argue over whether Darwin's extrapolations were warranted---given the evidence.

Or lack thereof.

Originally Posted by Prince of Space

Are you kidding? I would recommend you visit some museums and talk to some actual scientists. Possibly even read some books by some actual scientists.

Exactly as I said in my original post in this thread...

the mere mention of anything related to a god and people's minds snap shut. Continuing to mention such terms and those same people start to wig out.

No, I'm not kidding and I'll warrant I've been to significantly more museums and spoken F2F with significantly more "scientists" than you have in your diminutive years, sonny.

Originally Posted by darth omar

It's often said that ID is religion. I can accept that it comprises unscientific philosophy [by the identical measure, so does abiogenesis, but it's still taught as 'science' in public schools] but I don't get the religion angle.

There is nothing in ID which excludes an alien intelligence; indeed, it is for precisely this reason that biblical young earth creationists reject intelligent design.

Maybe you can explain that.

Intelligent design was made up by Christian Creationists as a response to Creationism being completely stripped out of public schools. I think it's pretty obvious on those grounds what the aim of Intelligent Design is. That's one of the main reasons that Intelligent Design has been barred from being taught at schools in the past, it is easily provable in a court of law that developers of Intelligent Design are pushing a specifically Christian God at work behind the scenes (Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, for example).

Nevermind the fact that a casting out natural selection and replacing it with a "Guiding hand" (God or alien) is not necessary at all and completely untestable, making it not only superfluous but completely unscientific.

Evolution is a proven scientific fact, not just some wild theory. Only a nation of dumb fucks would still be debating the issue in the 21st century.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Intelligent design was made up by Christian Creationists as a response to Creationism being completely stripped out of public schools.

I'm certain you would never make such a statement without some evidence to back it up. If you would please supply your evidence so that we can review it, I would appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Nevermind the fact that a casting out natural selection and replacing it with a "Guiding hand" (God or alien) is not necessary at all and completely untestable, making it not only superfluous but completely unscientific.

So that's your threshold? That it is testable?

Please show how inter-species evolution has been tested. Or, better, please show how we have tested (or observed, even) the formation of the original protein.

Originally Posted by Speakeasy

Nevermind the fact that a casting out natural selection and replacing it with a "Guiding hand" (God or alien) is not necessary at all and completely untestable, making it not only superfluous but completely unscientific.

Seems to me that both abiogenesis and a "guiding hand" are both equally untestable.

Would that not make both superfluous but completely unscientific?

Originally Posted by Ted

Evolution is a proven scientific fact, not just some wild theory. Only a nation of dumb fucks would still be debating the issue in the 21st century.

Did somebody miss their bran this morning?