Intelligent design and creationism

[monsoon]

The question isn't in what people believe in. If someone wants to think there is a fairy leaving babies under cabbage leaves that is their right and I don't really care.

The question is should those beliefs be called a science and taught in the public schools. Given the diverse opinions here, and the fact that it isn't a science, obviously that answer is no.

[cheeriokid61]

I guess creationism shouldn't be taught in science class, but definately in social studies. I hate it when people say that Christianity should never be taught in schools, but other religions like Islam and Hinduism should.

[dimebag1980]

I guess creationism shouldn't be taught in science class, but definately in social studies. I hate it when people say that Christianity should never be taught in schools, but other religions like Islam and Hinduism should.

I've never been taught Islam or Hinduism in Social Studies. Social Studies touches very little on most topics, so Christianity should be included in that (and was in my Social Studies curriculum.) But where would you fit creation into Social Studies? You can talk about Christianity without getting into creation. Just don't turn Social Studies into Christian Studies.

[monsoon]

There is nothing wrong with teaching how Christianity, especially the Catholic church was a part of western civilization and how it influenced the Roman Empire, the crusades against the Muslems, the Reformation, and Protestants escaping the church to come to the new world. But the teaching of Christian dogma is another matter entirely and should not happen. Same for any other religion and to my knowledge nobody is suggesting that children be taught Hindu over Christianity. That is just more FUD being spewed out by the religious extremists who are claiming they are being treated unfairly.

[MJLO]

I think they should teach both sides. Since niether is truly proveable, since noone was there.

[monsoon]

I think they should teach both sides. Since niether is truly proveable, since noone was there.

As I said earlier. The Christian Bible says God created everything in 7 days. There isn't anything else to teach unless you want to teach what all the other religions say about creation. The christian story is rather boring if you ask me. Maybe they should tell the kiddies about creation as described by Scientology. Now that one really is an interesting story.

In any case, as a tax payer, I don't support telling these fables in public school.

[MJLO]

I agree metro, I just don't think they should tell either side, since evolution is just as much fabled. The christian bible also says that a thousand years is like a day to god. So if he did create it, who knows how long it really took.

[monsoon]

....since evolution is just as much fabled. ...

Well... no it isn't. Evolution has been observed in nature and is there is plently of scientific evidence to backup much of the theory. To my knowledge, there has never been any proof ever found that would support the book of Genesis. In addition, evolution, which is not a religion, but a science, is understood and accepted across the entire world. Christianity is virtually non-existant in parts of the world where they would laugh at Genesis.

Christianity = Religion, Evolution = Science. There is a tremendous difference.

[MJLO]

I guess I disagree with you on that. In that scientific theory changes, science itself evolves over time. I go back to my original point, noone was here when it all began, so I don't really trust either theory.

that is to say, logic tells me, sooner or later, at some point something had to come from nothing.

[SouthParkRocks]

I guess I disagree with you on that. In that scientific theory changes, science itself evolves over time. I go back to my original point, noone was here when it all began, so I don't really trust either theory.

that is to say, logic tells me, sooner or later, at some point something had to come from nothing.

Evolution is a theory. Creationism is NOT a theory. One can believe or disbelieve whatever one wants to but don't mistakingly lump creationism into a scientific term like a theory. It does not meet in any way shape or form that definition.

[MJLO]

ok then, if not theory, then what.

[SouthParkRocks]

It is a religious story from the bible- some folks believe it all so it could be a part of your reality or not. Some folks think we all must believe it as well because they feel so strongly about their religious beliefs. It simply is not science.

Faith is all about believing in that which cannot be proved. Which is why I find organized religion and its followers absolutely facinating but cannot follow the bleeting sheep myself.

[colin]

Evolution is both fact and theory. If you look it up in the dictionary, there are two definitions pertaining to biology.

First, it is a verifiable scientific process. I always point out the more recent example of the early 20th-century flu epidemic, in which over 95% of the world's was infected. Millions died, most of which were those who were susceptible to that particular flu strain. Result? Virutally all of us living today are descendents of those who were resistent to that strain. That is evolution.

Second, it is a historical theory. The theory is where the contention starts, and I'm not going to weigh in, because you get into arguments about religion, which never end up anywhere. But I do see creationism as mostly a rationalization: a haphazard way of explaining something that was previously left unexplained to make obvioius facts and contradictory religious theories fit together.

To me, it's always seemed like trying to jam puzzle pieces together that obviously do not fit: sure, you can certainly make it work, but it's going to cause conflict elsewhere and is not the best path in the long run.

Like I said though, not going to get involved.

One of the funniest things I think I've ever seen regarding creationism was in Texas, near Dinosaur Valley State Park. The state park itself has dinosaur footprints in a river bed and celebrates their archaeological significance. On the road to the state park, there is a creationist museum, with a sign saying something like "Come see the truth behind the dinosaurs!" I've never been able to find out more on it, but it's always stuck out in my mind.

[SouthParkRocks]

We have the "Institute for Creation Research" here in San Diego where one can obtain a graduate degree in Creation Science among other things.

Unfortunately real accreditation is yet forthcoming so one's career choices with said degree include being a docent in the attached musem but that's about it.

[Gusterfell]

ok then, if not theory, then what.

I can't stand when Creationists use the "evolution is only a theory" line. It shows absolutely no understanding of how science works, and is a perfect demonstration of how lacking science education is in this country. If we are going to keep up with the rest of the world, we need to strengthen the science curriculum, not weaken it with creation mythology, from any religion. The fact that America is even having this debate is seen as a joke in virtually every other country.

In science, a theory is about as soundly proven as anything gets. Sure, some details might change over time as information is gathered, but an entire theory is almost never overturned.

As evidence, I offer the flu virus. If not for the virus' ability to evolve to new threats, how do you explain the fact that we need to develop an entirely new vaccine every season?

[monsoon]

We have the "Institute for Creation Research" here in San Diego where one can obtain a graduate degree in Creation Science among other things.

Unfortunately real accreditation is yet forthcoming so one's career choices with said degree include being a docent in the attached musem but that's about it.

And one can get a degree in Hamburgerology from McDonald's University. (I kid you not) The point is that you can call it whatever you want, but believing a God created everything, is not science.

The term Creation Science is nothing but double speak.

[GRDadof3]

It is a religious story from the bible- some folks believe it all so it could be a part of your reality or not. Some folks think we all must believe it as well because they feel so strongly about their religious beliefs. It simply is not science.

Faith is all about believing in that which cannot be proved. Which is why I find organized religion and its followers absolutely facinating but cannot follow the bleeting sheep myself.

Do we have to resort to name-calling? I thought this forum was for people with an "open mind" who wanted to broaden their horizons. Or did I miss something?

Intelligent Design, as far as I know, doesn't specify that everything came from a specific creator (God, Mohammed, Buddha, etc.), or any particular organized religion, but just a "creator".

They do raise some interesting points and some glaring holes in the theory of evolution, if people actually read it without dismissing it out of hand. It's the same as critics of "The Last Temptation of Christ" or DaVinci Code who never even saw the movie or read the book.

Whether it should be sanctioned in public schools is another issue.

[hood]

I would be interested to hear what some of the "glaring holes" in the theory of evolution are...

[cjpetter]

I can't stand when Creationists use the "evolution is only a theory" line. It shows absolutely no understanding of how science works, and is a perfect demonstration of how lacking science education is in this country. If we are going to keep up with the rest of the world, we need to strengthen the science curriculum, not weaken it with creation mythology, from any religion. The fact that America is even having this debate is seen as a joke in virtually every other country.

In science, a theory is about as soundly proven as anything gets. Sure, some details might change over time as information is gathered, but an entire theory is almost never overturned.

As evidence, I offer the flu virus. If not for the virus' ability to evolve to new threats, how do you explain the fact that we need to develop an entirely new vaccine every season?

From what I understand about science and theories, for a theory to be 100% true it also needs to be followed by a proof. Theories are only the starting point for proving anything. Maybe I'm just a "bleating sheep" but I feel that I was created with thought and design. When I watched my son's birth three weeks ago I didn't feel like he was just evolved from some organism, an accident on the planet. I'm just stating my beliefs, everyone is free to believe what they want. Maybe someday there will be solid

[SouthParkRocks]

I don't think I'm calling anybody harsh names here, and I'm all about broadening horizons.

I have stressed that anyone can believe anything they want but scientific theory is what it is and ID is simply a fancy name for creationism with no scientific support to back it up. To point out a couple of supposed "missing links" in the whole realm of evolutionary biology as glaring holes is simply not true. Nothing discovered has disproven evolutionary theory, and there are not glaring holes or missing links that make the theory fall apart-there are of course things yet to be discovered and real scientists have no issue with new verifiable data that totally disproves previous theories.

[cjpetter]

I don't think I'm calling anybody harsh names here, and I'm all about broadening horizons.

I have stressed that anyone can believe anything they want but scientific theory is what it is and ID is simply a fancy name for creationism with no scientific support to back it up. To point out a couple of supposed "missing links" in the whole realm of evolutionary biology as glaring holes is simply not true. Nothing discovered has disproven evolutionary theory, and there are not glaring holes or missing links that make the theory fall apart-there are of course things yet to be discovered and real scientists have no issue with new verifiable data that totally disproves previous theories.

Did I miss where somebody disproved intelligent design? Or the idea that there really could be a Creator?

[SouthParkRocks]

Did I miss where somebody disproved intelligent design? Or the idea that there really could be a Creator?

Uh... One iota of evidence or proof to begin with. There is no proof of ID

Congratulations on the birth of your beautiful son. The inference that there is not wonder and amazement at the creations that have come forth from the millions of generations and millions of living beings is stale. I think that is the most amazing thing of all.

Again, you are free to believe what you wish to believe but to force it upon an educational framework in the guise of science is what the thread is ultimately about. That intention is what is egregiously offensive and logically just wrong to some of us.

Show me the repeatable and testable proof of ID, I'll consider it. That doesn't mean nuances of evolution that don't fit perfectly. I will not argue with your religion or belief system-that is completely pointless.

Just don't weaken scientific research more than it already has because of religious influence in this country.

[hood]

From what I understand about science and theories, for a theory to be 100% true it also needs to be followed by a proof. Theories are only the starting point for proving anything. Maybe I'm just a "bleating sheep" but I feel that I was created with thought and design. When I watched my son's birth three weeks ago I didn't feel like he was just evolved from some organism, an accident on the planet. I'm just stating my beliefs, everyone is free to believe what they want. Maybe someday there will be solid

[MJLO]

While I am not particularly religious, even at all. I find this debate tiresome. All of this talk about science. Give me PROOF that life created itself. Or give me PROOF that there is a higher power, who created everything. Anyone who believes everything they here from a scientist, is just as much a bleeting sheep, as those bleeting sheep who go to church, and look to something greater than they are to believe in.

I liken it to a conspiracy theory that I believe about the pharmecutical industry. I don't believe they are into finding cures. If they cured illness how would they make money? If a scientist, who is looking for proof of evolution, and is being funded by someone else, what's to stop them from falsifying results, to make it look like they are gaining ground, whereas in reality they are trying to cover their asses so as not to lose income. Not saying it happens, i'm just saying that if there's a constant I know about SCIENCE (you know since i'm part of the uneducated American mass) it's that science CHANGES.

The only constant I have found in life is to trust my own instincts

Remember when "science" said the earth was flat? Remember when "science" said we had reached the pinnacle of technology, and there was no possible way we could find any new technology at the turn of the 20th century? I dare anyone, to stand up to me, and be so arrogant as to say that "science" has found all the answers now. Anyone can rely on science, and throw science in my face all they want. I want PROOF, that there isn't a god, and I want PROOF that there is. I'm not trying to take a stance on either position in this argument. But for heavens sakes guys, stop belittling people, talking down to them just because they don't put there faith in "science".

[Ruso]

According to a 2006 Gallup poll 46% of Americans believe creationism with no possibility for evolution.

Wow....

MJLO is a creationist. For him it's a logic thing.

He also likes to post in third person.

How can it be a logic thing?

I respect anyone's believes, but it is undeniable that faith is based purely on a "desire to not be alone", on supertitions, on tradition,and not on anything logical

I guess creationism shouldn't be taught in science class, but definately in social studies. I hate it when people say that Christianity should never be taught in schools, but other religions like Islam and Hinduism should.

I have nver heard that. Nevertheless, I do think that it would be great to be able to study christianity and islam, and every religion in the world, but from an objective perspective, and not as an obligatory subject. I myself might consider to get a degree in religion studies, but from a historical point of view.

I think they should teach both sides. Since niether is truly proveable, since noone was there.

You were not there when Hitler decided to invade Poland, yet you do have enough data and support to accept that event as true. The same wth evolution.

I agree metro, I just don't think they should tell either side, since evolution is just as much fabled.

Science is supposedly based on facts and proofs. If something is not provable, then it is trashed. Thus, a widely accepted theory such as evolution cannot consist of fabble.

And one can get a degree in Hamburgerology from McDonald's University. (I kid you not) The point is that you can call it whatever you want, but believing a God created everything, is not science.

The term Creation Science is nothing but double speak.

Go Orwell!

And that hamburgerology thing is terrifying, lol...I did not even know that there is a McDonald's University...