[Fester Chugabrew]

I'm not sure I understand what sort of "agent of intelligence or design", other than a god, could enable life.

I'm not sure either. I think I'll chug another brew and wait for science to explain it to me. I do know a couple good magicians, however. Maybe they did it.

[js1138]

The high school material isn't online yet, but it's inspired by these folks:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the ping!

Amelia: I'm not sure I understand what sort of "agent of intelligence or design", other than a god, could enable life.

Fester: I'm not sure either. I think I'll chug another brew and wait for science to explain it to me. I do know a couple good magicians, however. Maybe they did it.

Actually, there is a prize being offered for the first credible answer to the underlying question:

Origin of Life Prize

"The Origin-of-Life Prize" ® (hereafter called "the Prize") consists of $1.35 Million (USD) paid directly to the winner(s). The Prize will be awarded for proposing a highly plausible mechanism for the spontaneous rise of genetic instructions in nature sufficient to give rise to life. To win, the explanation must be consistent with empirical biochemical and thermodynamic concepts as further delineated herein, and be published in a well-respected, peer-reviewed science journal(s).

I find it quite interesting that, like national missile defense, many if not most people presume that science has an answer to the question, What is life? It doesn't. It isn’t obvious what the difference might be between a lifeless thing and a living thing. Biologists don't care but physicists and mathematicians do, and they are looking (Pattee, Rocha, Yockey, etc.):

The Physics of Symbols

Syntactic Autonomy

At present, it appears physicists and mathematicians are focusing on information, which is defined by Shannon as a successful communication, as that which separates the living from the non-living. The first highly plausible origin for such information will win the above prize.

Although there are many interesting possibilites involving geometric physics and dimensionality - and especially Tegmark's Level IV universe model, we are nevertheless bound by the fact that the universe or multi-verse or cyclic or ekpyrotic cosmology all must have a beginning. And as Rocha points out, information must arise from a change of states (like a computer would perform an algorithm) in order to give rise to autonomous biological self-organizing complexity. Therefore, I strongly believe the actual origin for information will ultimately be determined as non-temporal, non-spatial and non-corporeal. IOW, the Word. But of course I'll keep watching to see how far science progresses in my lifetime.

For more information on my musings: Evolution through the backdoor

[js1138]

You do believe, don't you that ninth graders are mature enough to be exposed to all major religions on an equal basis, and decide for themselves, on the basis of objective evidence, which are true and which are false?

[js1138]

Here's an example from their site:

"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity" Albert Einstein

I know several of the ID proponents on this thread have mentioned Einstein as an example of a scientist with faith. I think he would be a perfect role model for ninth graders, don't you?