Intelligent Design

[Yami_Ichi]

I logged onto my internet today, and on the side they have some of the top headlines for today. One peticular caught my eye, something to do with intelligent design. Here is the article:

MSNBC News

TOPEKA, Kan. - Kansas Board of Education members who approved new classroom standards that call evolution into question faced a counterattack at the polls Tuesday from Darwin’s defenders.

Five of the 10 seats on the board were up for election in the primary, the latest skirmish in a seesawing battle between faith and science that has opened Kansas up to international ridicule.

Last November, the Board of Education’s 6-to-4 conservative Republican majority rewrote testing standards for public schools to incorporate language supported by advocates of intelligent design, which holds that life is so complex it must have been created by some kind of higher power. The new standards say that some aspects of evolution are contradicted by scientific evidence.

On Tuesday, three members of the majority faced GOP primary foes who support evolution. A fourth Republican conservative is retiring, and her seat was up for grabs.

The fifth seat was held by Janet Waugh, a Kansas City Democrat who opposed the new standards. She faced a more conservative Democrat who favored the anti-evolution language.

Which way will the trend go?
Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, Calif., which supports the teaching of evolution, said conservative victories would generate attempts to adopt Kansas’ standards elsewhere.

“There are people around the country who would like to see the Kansas standards in their own states,” she said.

Also Tuesday, Kansas Republicans chose a nominee from among seven candidates to challenge Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius.

Part of nationwide campaign
The school board contest was part of a larger effort by the intelligent design movement to introduce its ideas in public schools.

A suburban Atlanta school district is locked in a legal dispute over its putting stickers in 35,000 biology textbooks declaring evolution “a theory, not a fact.”

Last year, in Dover, Pa., voters ousted school board members who had required the biology curriculum to include mention of intelligent design. A federal judge struck down the policy, declaring intelligent design is religion in disguise.

A poll by six news organizations last year suggested about half of Kansans thought evolution should be taught alongside intelligent design.

“I feel like if you give two sides of something, most people are intelligent enough to make up their own minds,” said Ryan Cole, a 26-year-old farmer and horse trainer from Smith County, along the Nebraska line.

Jests on both sides
Board member Connie Morris’ race in western Kansas was the most closely watched. The retired teacher has described evolution as “an age-old fairy tale” and “a nice bedtime story” unsupported by science.

Control of the school board has slipped into, out of and back into conservative Republicans’ hands since 1998, resulting in anti-evolution standards in 1999, evolution-friendly ones in 2001 and anti-evolution ones again last year.

Late-night comedians have been making cracks about Kansas, portraying it as backward and ignorant. Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show” broadcast a four-part series titled, “Evolution Schmevolution.”
Proponents of Kansas’ latest standards contend they encourage open discussion.

“Students need to have an accurate assessment of the state of the facts in regard to Darwin’s theory,” said John West, a vice president for the Center for Science and Culture at the Seattle-based Discovery Institute. The institute has been a leader of the intelligent-design campaign.

Kansas' standards say that the evolutionary theory that all life had a common origin has been challenged by fossils and molecular biology. And they say there is controversy over whether changes over time in one species can lead to a new species.

In response, most evolutionary scientists say that the controversy has been generated by intelligent-design proponents motivated by cultural rather than strictly scientific interests.

And then here is a link to the article for those of you who want it. There are some sub-articles and some updates on this site, well links to them anyway. So, it might be something that a few of you would want to look at.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14137751/

So, to all the members of GAU, where do you stand on intelligent design being taught in schools?

Article

Last November, the Board of Education’s 6-to-4 conservative Republican majority rewrote testing standards for public schools to incorporate language supported by advocates of intelligent design, which holds that life is so complex it must have been created by some kind of higher power.

I do believe that intelligent design is a nice theory, but here is where I think that it should not be taught in school. It incorporates the fact of telling children that there is some higher power out there that created everything. Another way for christians to spark some young minds into being curious.

I really think that religion and school should be seperate, and the intelligent design theory is something that does, in fact, incorporate religion into it, whether some people realize it or not.

Article

“I feel like if you give two sides of something, most people are intelligent enough to make up their own minds,” said Ryan Cole, a 26-year-old farmer and horse trainer from Smith County, along the Nebraska line.

Yes, most people are smart enough to make their own decisions on matters. But the church is already weeding it's way into public organizations and just about everything else, that they now feel that they need to be in the schools to "get to them before the evolutionists do," as my pastor told me.

Intelligent design is a nice idea, but has no place in the school. I know that people argue that there are holes in evolution and that parts of it have been disproved, but the same holds true for evolution. Some of the ideas in evolution are far-fetched, but the same is true for intelligent design. They argue that they need to bring in another theory, because the one they have in place now has flaws. Well, hello! They both do! You don't get rid of the flaws of something by covering it up with the flaws of something else.

 

[Tiptoer]

I say it should be taught in schools as long as Evolution is taught side-by-side.

A good argument for ID is that if we are so complex, that we require a divine creator, then wouldn't this divine creator be even more complicated, requiring a creator itself? It creates a web of creators.


And evolution's been proven and is seen today, example, the very things that started Darwinism, Galapagos Finches.  

[Sanguvixen]

My stance is thus:

Science involves things that can be tested, proven, or disproven.

Evolution is science, because it can be tested, and different parts can be proven or disproven.

Intelligent Design is not science. It cannot be tested. It cannot be proven. It cannot be disproven. It has no basis in science. It does not belong in science class because it is not science.

Do they teach Mythology in Science Class? Do they do test to try to figure out how a Dragon could breath fire? No...they do not because that is not science.

I don't want ID in schools, because it would make a mock of all science classes, as religion has done to logic. As far as thiests go, logic has no place in thier diety's plan.

Faith is faith, Science Fiction is Science Fiction, and Science is Science. Science and Faith should be seperate.

That judge was right. ID is religion wearing a lab coat. To bad it doesn't have much of a disguise.

How the hell can you teach ID as a scientific subject? You can't...it's BS.

 

[Tiptoer]

^ Well put.

I'm going to revoke my statement that it would be okay if side-by-side to evolution, as SanguVixen put it, it's simply not science.  

[Sanguvixen]

When it comes down to it this is the problem that people see with Evolution Theory.

We know that things have changed over the years. We know that when exposed to different stimili living things can adapt, and change shape.

What we don't know are the exact variables that instigate that change. Does evolution occur in response to a change in habitat, or a change in behavior?

How long does it take for the change to result in a new organism?

What causes Evolution is what is being debated. Since we don't know what exactly causes it yet, people come up with theories that can be either tested, or researched. Some theories explain some things evolving, and fail to explain the evolution of others. Every single proposed idea is flawed at this point.

That does not mean the idea is flawed. It just means we haven't found it yet.

A while back....a long time ago, people believed in Spontanous Evolution. They believed that if something really wanted to change into something else, than they could do it.

Basically in thier line of thinking...if a rodent wanting to fly badly enough, than it would eventually sprout wings, and fly. Today we know that that doesn't happen. We know rodents are of a different family than bats.

I don't care how much I want to sprout wings and fly. I can't...I can find other means to get in the air, but I can't just gain wings out of my back based on will. So that is a theory that was tested, and disproven many years ago, and thus discarded.

Until we can discover the underlying conditions that truelly instigate a change of one organism into another....people will attack Evolution.

So the Intelligent Design movement is little more than an attempt to wipe out any attempt at finding that underlying order, and replacing it with the already widely accepted idea by thiests that "God simply did it."

If people find that underlying order, than that would negate religion in it's entirety. The idea of a god is to explain our existance, the existance of our world, and the existance of our universe. If it can be proven that things evolve on thier own, than that means that we too could have evolved from an early organism, and that means that the idea of god is...dead.

If it can be proven we are the evolved form of another organism...be it an ancestor that is shared with the monkey, and the ape....than the bible no longer has value. All of those creation stories all over the world will be false.

So the chance that we may find it is a threat to the existance of religion. It can be a very big blow. So if they attack this emerging science in it's infancy...they can potentially knock off a future problem for them.

When stuff like this happened in the past...the result was to chop of the heads of those who proposed new ideas(that challanged faith). They can't do that anymore. So to create something...a false other side, a religion in a lab coat...that is all they can do.

All they can do is spread false propoganda, and get people to accept that life is so complex that a higher deity(AKA thier God) created it.

They want to gain back the flock that has turned away. If they can get many people to accept that "God did it" than less people will attempt to seek out and figure out what really causes organisms to evolve.

 

[Redem]

ID is obviously not scientific, it's bad philosophy.

And as such, should never be taught to students. Teaching about ID in a philosophy class is another matter entirely, much like teaching about religion in a religious studies class is fine.

But teaching it to students as a valid idea is a disgrace.  

[Emmanuela]

If they want to teach ID, they should teach it in RE, not science, as ID is far more of a religious theory then a scientific one.  

[King_seth]

We can't have intelligent design taught in schools, I mean, Darwinism is fantastic, what does it teach kids? If you aren't the best, you won't get laid, BRILLIANT! We'll have high school students working their asses off to try and be the best, it'll improve the standard of life world over. Sure, it might cause a little undue stress, but at the end of the day we're going to have intelligent kids who work hard!

Intelligent design though, what does THAT teach kids? What if kids start acting like god! I mean think about it, god did 6 days of hard work right? Then on the seventh day he rested, what'd he do on the eigth day? NOTHING! The day after that? NOTHING! So on and so forth. We're going to have kids who put it a few days of work, then give up for life, they'll just go around, setting stuff on fire (The burning bush), wasting the worlds natural resources (Attempting to flood the world, these won't be the brightest cookies having only done 6 days of schoolwork in their lives so they'll probably just leave the taps on), have illegitemate children with already married women (Jesus) and then in their old ages become recluses feeding on the peoples wealth. I SAY NO! We don't want a generation of idiotic, unschooled, pyromanical people who won't take responsibility for their own actions!

BAN INTELLIGENT DESIGN!!  

[Tenth Speed Writer]

Hosnap


I just realized something. ID is going to be all I get this upcoming year.

Can addseale2 survive the rigors of fundicademy?

Will intelligent design break his iron will?

WILL the 700 Club EVER be CANCELED?

TUNE IN TOMRROW FOR MORE!  

[Sanguvixen]

If you are looking for a little insight into the far fetched world of Creationism...than take a look at this:

http://www.atheists.org/evolution/wild.html

It is long, but very interesting, amusing, and beneficial. Those who have a bit of time might do well to read this.

To find more things like this go here: http://www.atheists.org/evolution/index.html

 

[Muaethia]

Hopefully, "Intelligent" design will never be taught over here. Then again, I wouldn't put it past schools, especially primary schools (younger children= more sponge-like information absorbing minds). Creationism is taught in Religious Education lessons in primary and secondary schools, and I agree with it being kept in the RE lessons rather than merging with what is scientific fact.

In secondary schools here (high schools) only evolution is taught in science classes, because only evolution comes up on exam papers. Period. It makes sense. I'm not so sure about the religious secondary schools (not as common as non-religious ones), i'll ask one of my friends who goes to the local catholic high what they teach there.

I noticed something the other day. On a dollar bill, there is the phrase "In God We Trust", right? On the back of our 10-pound note, there is a picture of Charles Darwin. (the queen is on the other side, though) whee

Does that reflect the general way of thinking in both countries? In a recent survey, only 40% of British teenagers said that they believed in a God or higher being, and I doubt most of them were Christian.

Does the keeping creationism to RE/RS lessons only encourage this suprisingly low percentage, you think?  

[Xanthir]

Sanguvixen

What we don't know are the exact variables that instigate that change. Does evolution occur in response to a change in habitat, or a change in behavior?

How long does it take for the change to result in a new organism?

What causes Evolution is what is being debated. Since we don't know what exactly causes it yet, people come up with theories that can be either tested, or researched. Some theories explain some things evolving, and fail to explain the evolution of others. Every single proposed idea is flawed at this point.

Nope. The cause of evolution is mutation and selection. That's *it*. Seriously. Now, there are many different types of selection. There's neutral selection (that is, statistical selection, where a trait can appear or dissapear without it being good or bad, just getting lucky). There's fitness selection. There's sexual selection. There are all kinds of different selection functions, each of which can explain different features arising or dissapearing. All of them are true to some degree, and there may be other selection functions that we haven't though of yet. However, the cause of evolution was discovered by Darwin. Mutation and selection. So simple!  

[PickleBoy]

Okay... seriously... Since when have we held a books word as truth in science? I mean... Its like... Saying that science can be explained away by nothing more than a few words written back when man was still wearing togas made of wool. Hello! Today we're in pants and shirts with nylon and lycra. Uhhh... I think that right there explains that we should, um, up our standards a little. Otherwise... Dude, the Earth really is flat. Morons.