Posted on 08/02/2005 4:16:26 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
President Bush waded into the debate over evolution and "intelligent design" Monday, saying schools should teach both theories on the creation and complexity of life.
In a wide-ranging question-and-answer session with a small group of reporters, Bush essentially endorsed efforts by Christian conservatives to give intelligent design equal standing with the theory of evolution in the nation's schools.
Bush declined to state his personal views on "intelligent design," the belief that life forms are so complex that their creation cannot be explained by Darwinian evolutionary theory alone, but rather points to intentional creation, presumably divine.
The theory of evolution, first articulated by British naturalist Charles Darwin in 1859, is based on the idea that life organisms developed over time through random mutations and factors in nature that favored certain traits that helped species survive.
Scientists concede that evolution does not answer every question about the creation of life, and most consider intelligent design an attempt to inject religion into science courses.
Bush compared the current debate to earlier disputes over "creationism," a related view that adheres more closely to biblical explanations. While he was governor of Texas, Bush said students should be exposed to both creationism and evolution.
On Monday, the president said he favors the same approach for intelligent design "so people can understand what the debate is about."
The Kansas Board of Education is considering changes to encourage the teaching of intelligent design in Kansas schools, and some are pushing for similar changes across the country.
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas. The answer is 'yes.'"
The National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science both have concluded there is no scientific basis for intelligent design and oppose its inclusion in school science classes. [Note from PH: links relevant to those organizations and their positions on ID are added by me at the end of this article.]
Some scientists have declined to join the debate, fearing that amplifying the discussion only gives intelligent design more legitimacy.
Advocates of intelligent design also claim support from scientists. The Discovery Institute, a conservative think tank in Seattle that is the leading proponent for intelligent design, said it has compiled a list of more than 400 scientists, including 70 biologists, who are skeptical about evolution.
"The fact is that a significant number of scientists are extremely skeptical that Darwinian evolution can explain the origins of life," said John West, associate director of the organization's Center for Science and Culture.
W stands for Winner
Like I said, creationist canards.
"Let's hear it for actual open-minded discussion in science classes..."
Do you really think a high school science class is the proper place for debating non-scientific "challenges" to science?
I mean, at the very least shouldn't the students actually *learn* what the science is before they engage in debate over it?
Would you find it appropriate for a high school chemistry class to make room in the program for a robust debate about whether or not there are really only four elements (air, earth, fire, and water)?
After all, the more "ideas" we expose kids to, the better. Right?
What are you, some kind of crazy person? Don't you KNOW that evolution, first purported by Darwin 150 years ago is FACT?! We have rock solid, experimental, observable examples of one species changing into another, better developed, "fitter" species. Everyone knows it. Everyone sees it.
Why should the theory of evolution even HAVE to stand up to any kind of test, when it is common knowledge? What a ridiculous position.
There is no intelligent designer. There is not such thing as "God", "love", "affection" or the like. These CONCEPTS--and they are ONLY concepts--are mere names we give to the chemical reactions within our neurological systems.
The sooner you wake up to these truths, the better off you'll be.
< \sarcasm>
Of course, Reagan was too.
OTOH, I think Jimmy Carter is against ID.
Clinton would say whatever the polls tell him.
Because there is enough hard evidence elevating the big bang and evolution to the status of "theory". However, there is none for creationism and ID. So they cannot be competing theories.
I SO enjoy lurking on these threads and watching you evolutionary zealots make fools of yourselves.
But once in a while, you're so ignorant and arrogant that I can't help but intervene and point that out.
This one's a doozy. VERY funny, but at the same very sad, that you are so ignorant of what understanding the Creator is all about, and how there is no conflict between faith and science, UNLESS the 'science' is based on false religion and post-modern philosophy...........as the pseudo science of evolution is.
If teachers and professors would teach only true science, we wouldn't be having this debate, and students wouldn't be being brainwashed in class and denied true scientific inquiry as they are now.
Your sarcasm is closer to reality than you might think.
Ignorant of science, not stupid except in commenting ex-CasaBlanca about that of which he is ignorant. The scienists that I have worked with distrust the GOP just because of things like this. They are all low-tax, pro-second-amendment, small-government types; they generally support things like the War On Terror but they will never vote GOP because the GOP is seen as the Stupid Party. I have heard this for years.
Since this is a politcal forum, I wonder how that little fact eludes them.
I also wonder if they blindly swallowed what their leftist political science profs shoved down their throats, like they swallowed what their leftist science profs shoved down their throats........
Inquiring minds want to know...... ;)
Looks like it. Maybe, in the name of exposing children to diverse ideas, we should teach the theory of human sacrifice...and the athiest's opinion of religion as central to primitive savagery.
I voted for Bush because I thought that our system, regardless of its faults, was a hundred times better than Islamofascism. I'm having serious doubts.
Scientific fallacy and scientific fact are NOT the same thing.
I see. Because man can create a hybrid corn, intelligent design of all life forms is thus proven. What a huge, and unwarranted, epistomological leap you've made.
Looks like it. Maybe, in the name of exposing children to diverse ideas, we should teach the theory of human sacrifice...and the athiest's opinion of religion as central to primitive savagery.
I voted for Bush because I thought that our system, regardless of its faults, was a hundred times better than Islamofascism. I'm having serious doubts.
Yeah, if you don't accept the theory of evolution, you have absolutely no business being a scientist!
Doesn't merit a reply.
Evolution has been observed as well. Read the list-o-links and home pages of both Ph and Ichneumon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.