Awesome Talking Library   Search:

News -08-06-05 Bush Remarks on Intelligent Design (Washington Post) "President Bush invigorated proponents of teaching alternatives to evolution in public schools with remarks saying that schoolchildren should be taught about 'intelligent design,' a view of creation that challenges established scientific thinking and promotes the idea that an unseen force is behind the development of humanity." "Bush's comments were 'irresponsible,' said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. He said the president, by suggesting that students hear two viewpoints, 'doesn't understand that one is a religious viewpoint and one is a scientific viewpoint.' " 8-05 Papers -Debate: Intelligent Design and Evolution (NewYorker.com) "Unlike earlier generations of creationists—the so-called Young Earthers and scientific creationists—proponents of intelligent design do not believe that the universe was created in six days, that Earth is ten thousand years old, or that the fossil record was deposited during Noah’s flood. (Indeed, they shun the label 'creationism' altogether.)" "Though people often picture science as a collection of clever theories, scientists are generally staunch pragmatists: to scientists, a good theory is one that inspires new experiments and provides unexpected insights into familiar phenomena. By this standard, Darwinism is one of the best theories in the history of science: it has produced countless important experiments (let’s re-create a natural species in the lab—yes, that’s been done) and sudden insight into once puzzling patterns (that’s why there are no native land mammals on oceanic islands). In the nearly ten years since the publication of Behe’s book, by contrast, I.D. has inspired no nontrivial experiments and has provided no surprising insights into biology. As the years pass, intelligent design looks less and less like the science it claimed to be and more and more like an extended exercise in polemics." "Biologists aren’t alarmed by intelligent design’s arrival in Dover and elsewhere because they have all sworn allegiance to atheistic materialism, they’re alarmed because intelligent design is junk science." 8-05 Debate: Intelligent Design and Evolution (ActionBioscience.org - Natural History Magazine) "In the final analysis, the biochemical hypothesis of intelligent design fails not because the scientific community is closed to it but rather for the most basic of reasons -- because it is overwhelmingly contradicted by the scientific evidence." 8-05 Editorial - Creationism in the Science Classroom (InterfaithAlliance.org) Provides a discussion of logic and law regarding teaching creationism in the science classroom. The article opposes teaching creationism in the classroom as one religious explanation among many religious explanations of creation. 11-04 Intelligent Design and Creationism (Wikipedia.org) "Despite ID sometimes being called Intelligent Design Theory, the National Academy of Sciences has said, intelligent design 'and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life' are not science because their claims cannot be tested by experiment and propose no new hypotheses of their own, instead they find gaps within current evolutionary theory and fill them in with speculative beliefs. The scientific community does not recognise ID as a scientific theory and considers it to be creationist pseudoscience." 8-05