[sirchtruth]

Evolution is no different than any religion
in that you have a bunch of facts you conclude
lead to evolution, but those facts don't prove
it.

[adam_az]

"Evolution is no different than any religion
in that you have a bunch of facts you conclude
lead to evolution, but those facts don't prove
it."

ID is no different than any religion in that you have a no facts that lead to ID, but you believe it anyway.

[Quick1]

In that regard, it is no different than Gravitation Theory, Atomic Theory, Quantum Theory...

Scientific theories cannot be proven. All they can do is gather mountains of evidence.

[photodawg]

Evolution is no different than any religion
in that you have a bunch of facts you conclude
lead to evolution, but those facts don't prove
it.
_________________________________________________________


Science deals with the objective world, the five senses.Evidence can only come from this source of information, and conclusions can only be drawn from this evidence.
Religion seeks to explain the causes for the objective world and as such it begins where science ends. Evolution does not attempt to explain creation, only describe its objective manifestations. Intelligent design leaves the objective world and attempts to explain how the physical, observable order of the objective world is so integrally, and complexly, patterned that it must have been created. That is not objective evidence, it requires the leap of faith, as it cannot be objectively proved. As a description of the physical universe, intelligent design is irrelevant and useless. As an explaination of our creation for our spirit and our soul, intellegent design is a very interesting and logical observance.

[I'm ALL Right!]

Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a THEORY. To suggest another theory is irrelevant is subjective and biased. Neither have been proven or disproven, so both are valid. Bush is right to say this is presenting different schools of thought, IMO.