'Intelligent design' theory threatens science classrooms

Seattle Post Intelligencer ^ | 11/22/2002 | ALAN I. LESHNER

[whattajoke]

How can anyone look at a newborn, or see the inside of a body without realizing that it was created with everything we need to survive? We didn't come from a fish or an ape; we were created by the hand of God, in His image. We are so beautifully created. It's magnificent. Non-believers just don't see it that way.

How can you look at a newborn or "the inside of a body" and definitively state, "We come from the hand of god?" do you say the same thing when looking at kittens, or the insides of a bug squashed on your windshield? And as far as being, "beautifully created," I have a laundry list of things wrong with human design. Things that a "perfect design" would assuredly have eliminated.

As for your contention that you didn't "come from a fish or an ape," I'll give a point for that one, since I assure you, you "came from" your parents.

The creationist worldview will eternally fascinate me.

[whattajoke]

If heaven is a place where I can be free from bible thumping christian fundies, I'll start repenting today.

[Stultis]

there is nothing in the fossil record or visible in nature [that supports evolution]

In another thread, in response to this same claim of yours, I posted evidence that I think provides very strong support indeed, not just for evolution in general, but also for the specific claim that humans and apes share a common ancestry.

I remind you of this because you are still making this 'no evidence for evolution' claim without having shared your thoughts on the apparent fusion in the human number 2 chromosome. You can find links to the relavant messages in that other thread by scrolling up to message #535 in this thread.

[whattajoke]

There are a lot of scientists who believe in creationism. I think more and more are questioning the theory of evolution. I sure hope so. I have a friend who teaches creationism in high school. He gives lectures on the subject and it's always interesting and amazing.

Yes, this is the latest creationist tactic/obfuscation. Go to one of your websites and forward us the list. But I must warn you, several of your "scientists" will be shown to be frauds and/or misleading. Others will have degrees from non biology fields. But at any rate, who cares? There's always going to be a tiny percentage of loons within a set of people. (ie. Log Cabins Repubs). There may be a couple hundred "scientists" who have problems with evolution... which accounts for an incredibly tiny portion of scientists. A statistically insignificant amount, to be sure.

As for you friend who is busy warping young minds, I'll agree... I too, find it "amazing" that his conscience allows him to spew his nonsense to unknowing kids.

[Aquinasfan]

The death of evolutionary theory has already occurred, the protests of the Seattle Post Intelligencer notwithstanding. Like most major philosophical shifts, it takes several decades before it becomes common wisdom.

[ThinkPlease]

There are a lot of scientists who believe in creationism.

I can remember the lists of scientists that the ICR and AiG and others toss out there of "scientists who doubt evolution". I think that Project Steve" is an appropriate response to those claims. Project Steve is a list of scientists (named Steve, obviously) who agree that evolution is a viable scientific theory. 220+ Steves, to be exact. If you go with the logic that 1 out of 100 men is named Steve (an over estimate?), than there are tens of thousands of scientists who support evolution, compared to the few hundreds who AiG regularly compiles.

The point behind Project Steve is to show that the ICR and AiG lists are fallacies. Science is not a democracy (or any political system for that matter), however, evidence is king. And right now, the evidence points toward evolution (a blend of Punctuated Equilibrium and Gradualism, to be exact).

[PatrickHenry]

PLACEMARKER

[Junior]

Well I must say that I'm disappointed.

Man in black:  Get used to disappointment.

(The Princess Bride, "The Fencing Match")

[Steel Eye]

>>>If that's what science did. In fact it does just the opposite. The whole scientific approach, especially the tentative and revisable status of scientific knowledge, is predicted on the understanding that we can only observe a small part of reality, and that there are inumerable phenomena and data that are not only outside of our observational grasp at any one time, but that we are totatally unaware of. Scientists know that in the future there will inevitably be obeservations that are totally unexpected.


That is a very honest "observation." And written, I might add, without any of the arrogance and condescension so prevalent on these threads. Thank you.

I have stumbled through my life relying on equal parts of both skepticism and faith. As I get older my faith is becoming stronger. And the one thing I have learned for certain, is how little I know, and how pointless it is to take myself too seriously.

[Steel Eye]

>> Get used to disappointment.

LOL. I did. Years ago.

[goodseedhomeschool]

are you kidding???? Punctuated equilibrium is a big part of "evolution" theory, at least it was the last time I heard.

[Aric2000]

Your assertion is patently false, but that never gets in your guys way.

[js1138]

are you kidding???? Punctuated equilibrium is a big part of "evolution" theory, at least it was the last time I heard.

It exists as a minority hypothesis within evolutionary theory. And even as such, it has limited application. Most living things are single celled, and their evolution is directly observable. For instance, you can start a bacteria colony from a single individual, and produce colonies resistent to antibiotics in a matter of weeks through mutation and selection.

[Junior]

The Princess Bride is a gold-mine of quotes.

[Steel Eye]

>>>The Princess Bride is a gold-mine of quotes.

I was just looking at that.

[Aric2000]

Good Morning to you....

Sleep well? I didn't, but still was up at 5 and drove to work, UGH!!!

[js1138]

It is no wonder so many seek reality, or truth, elsewhere.

LOL. You mean like religion, where there is absolute consensus. Interesting that the Gospel of Thomas, an eyewitness to Jesus, didn't make it into the Bible.

[Marysecretary]

Your THEORY is just that, a theory. I believe what the word of God says because He is the ultimate creator. I didn't crawl out of the water and neither did my parents or grandparents. We were made by design, by a creator God who formed us in His image.

[whattajoke]

Your THEORY is just that, a theory.

Often this statement is considered a sufficient dissenting argument. But it really is an expression of ignorance about how science works. I remind you that everything we understand about how things work in this world is ‘theoretical.’ Architects consult architectural theory. Structural engineers designing a bridge consult structural engineering theory. Medical doctors consult medical theory. Repeat, scientific theories are discoveries of how our natural reality is organized. To the extent a theory is useful it will be used. To the extent a theory is not useful it won’t be used. Given the power and utility of the theories that form the foundation of modern, technological civilization, a statement like the one above reflects a failure to understand this.

I didn't crawl out of the water and neither did my parents or grandparents.

Step one to understanding evolution: Awareness that it takes longer than a generation to manifest itself acutely. Well done.

[VadeRetro]

However, we all know (assuming you are, indeed, knowledgeable in this area) there is nothing in the fossil record or visible in nature.

Appeals to "what we all know" so often are just begging the question.

1. We don't all know that there's nothing in the fossil record.
2. We don't all know there's nothing visible in nature.
3. Some of us even think that there are 29+ Lines of Evidence Pointing to Evolution.

I was just wondering if you had found something unbeknownst to the rest of us. Evidently not.

I think you're confusing being pig-ignorant with being "knowledgeable."