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.
Wow! You too?
Some lurkers may have. A lot of good information appears in these threads. You may be very closed minded to the subject (I was too when I was a fundie) but most people are pretty open minded.
Why would God say he created the world and everything in it if he didn't?
That does not follow at all. First of all, the TOE does not say we arose randomly. Random mutation plus natural selection operating according to the laws of nature explain our origin as a species. Notice that random mutation is only one part of the process.
Second of all, the TOE leaves room for belief in a Creator who set up the laws of nature so that an intelligent being who could know Him and love Him would eventually evolve, and then breathed an immortal soul into him once the process was complete. Perhaps God even "tweaked" the process by causing an occaisonal mutuation here and there. If he did this very rarely, the whole process would still appear random to the scientist.
It has been argued, quite convincingly, that randomness in nature is necessary for the existence of free will. If the universe were completely deterministic, then everything would be pre-determined. Thus it would be impossible for any creature to be free to choose anything. How fitting, therefore, that God chose to create us using a process that includes randomness, the very thing that allows us to have free will.
Evolution is simply a word meaning change. The TOE that you are speaking starts with the first replicator/s I presume. That doesn't prevent others from positing hypotheses and theories about evolution pre replicator. And they do just that. So whats the argument about?
I'm open minded. I believe the Bible is true.
"However, people who work in ...the educational industry should be considered more authoritative that some random person. "
Wow!
That is one of the wildest posts I have ever read! Anyone else want to jump on the educational industry bandwagon?
(We could really have some fun and talk about educational industry experts v. homeschool parents....now THAT would be fun!)
#####You may be very closed minded to the subject (I was too when I was a fundie)....#####
That wins the ironic quote of the month award.
Science Faculty
These are generally much more conservative, or libertarian, than the posts around here would have you believe.
All of academia is not flaming liberal.
Including the Exodus refs I posted re slavery?
Do I believe the Israelites were held in slavery? Yes I do.
Wrong. All chemical evolutoin is able to explain, thus far, is the emergence of chemicals that are necessary for the sustaining of life.
Furthermore, chemical evolution is a completely different theory from biological evolution, and in standard English, the "theory of evolution" only refers to the latter.
Currently, there is no good testable scientific theory that can explain the origin of life, and every biology textbook I have seen acknowledges it.
Go check those refs...that's not what they are about.
I think this should be an extension/revision of the internet argument "Nazi-mention-rule".
Have a good day.
Determisim or randomness? Whats the difference? If either is causal then free will doesn't exist.
BFLR = bump for later reading. This should get interesting.
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.