The reason Christians and others are fighting this battle at all, is not that they are so anxious to wade into science, but that science for many decades, has jumped in feet first into religion. Christians are tired of the philosophical/religious attacks on them made in the name of science.
When evolutionists stop making statements, like the populizer Carl Sagan frequently did, of "The Universe is all that there is and all that there ever will be," which is nothing less than an assertion of philosophical/religious belief, not science, then I don't think real scientists will need to worry about religous people trying to make assertions about science.
Intelligent Design, as the article makes clear, INCLUDES the tenent that a Christian may believe evolution--just an evolution with God as God. Evolutionists, on the other hand, seem to insist that anything other than outright atheism (or at least agnosticism) is unacceptable, even unthinkable, to be assumed in evolution.
As long as that sort of dogmatism in the scientific education community reigns, expect the Intelligent Design movement to grow.
Not in the form of evolution. Evolution is a farce of the highest order. Evolution perpetrated as FACT is a lie!
This notion that God created and the rest evolved is just as unfactual and unscientific in it's conclusions.
I have never heard this sort of dogmatism from a scientific community. Carl Sagan spoke for Carl Sagan as far as I can tell and if he did say the things you quote, it's his opinion.
I don't know very many outright atheists among the several scientists I know personally. Most of them would reject out of hand the assertion of a null hypothesis. However, I will never understand the hubris adopted inherently by the anti-evolution crowd who would have the temerity to limit how the Almighty might effect His creation. Who among us has the standing to discuss the limits he feels the Creator has been obliged to work within to begin creation? Who says that the use of evolution is not allowed to the Creator? I have not the gall to make such a statement.
Thank you. That makes it perfectly clear ID is a religious, not a scientific concept. As such it should not be included in school science classes.
(Didn't think this would be settled so quickly)
When evolutionists stop making statements, like the populizer Carl Sagan frequently did, of "The Universe is all that there is and all that there ever will be," which is nothing less than an assertion of philosophical/religious belief, not science, then I don't think real scientists will need to worry about religious people trying to make assertions about science.
With all due respect, sir, this is nonsense. It is nonsense because you are asserting guilt by association. You are generalizing from a few specific cases to the general case.
It is no more logical or fair then if I were to say: "All Christians are hypocrites because Tammy Faye Baker's husband was a philanderer." That is clearly not fair because one man's failure doesn't reflect on all Christians. (I will acknowledge that many liberal media outlets did indeed make this implication. However, they are liberals.) You cannot judge all science or scientists because of a few.
In particular, those of us who are scientists and Christians take exception. I am tired of having my faith questioned just because I am a scientist and believe in evolution.
Finally, a voice of reason in all of this. I seldom read much or any of the evolution threads because of the dogmatic insistance from both sides that only their side is the one that should be taught.
The above is simply not true. Whether or not evolution is true has no bearing on whether or not God exists. Yes I know, a few evolutionary biologists like Richard Dawkins think evolution proves atheism, but when they make assertions like that, they're not acting as scientists, but philosophers, and incompetent ones at that.
Intelligent Design, as the article makes clear, INCLUDES the tenent that a Christian may believe evolution--just an evolution with God as God. Evolutionists, on the other hand, seem to insist that anything other than outright atheism (or at least agnosticism) is unacceptable, even unthinkable, to be assumed in evolution.
You are exactly correct. They are *already* teaching religious beliefs in the science classroom.