Theory of intelligent design making its way into Broward textbooks (Florida)

Sun-sentinel.com ^ | December 9, 2005 | Chris Kahn

[mlc9852]

Broward County on Thursday narrowed its choices for high school Biology I textbooks to two finalists, both of which have been under scrutiny by Christian conservatives who want to change the way students learn about the origin of life.

Both have edited passages about evolution theory during the past few years after receiving complaints from the Discovery Institute. The think tank sponsors research on intelligent design, which argues life is so complicated, it must have been fashioned by a higher being. One of the books also has added a short section on creationism.

[b_sharp]

"If they found Noah's ark, would you believe in a world-wide flood?

Depends on where they find it and if they can verify it is actually 'the' ark. There are a lot of other questions that would also have to be answered.

Smart money is betting it was a local flood, a much smaller boat and just the owner's livestock.

[mlc9852]

Why do you not?

[mdmathis6]

Tell me something...this new species...it does look like a sunflower right? Same as its parents'?

[ml1954]

Why shouldn't I take the Koran literally?

[brightforestway]

They tried those experiments with fruit flies for more generations of fruit flies than there have ever been of primates in our world. They subjected them to everything in the world known to cause mutations and then recombined the mutants every possible way. All they ever got was fruit flies. Several of the scientists involved publically renounced evolution as a result.

[Fester Chugabrew]

A "reduction in certainty" is hardly the same thing as being "useless." Which do you propose? I hear over and over again that science is not interested in "proofs." If that's the case, then "supernatural" considerations may be allowed, however major or minor they may be.

. . . how do we convince ourselves it was honest run?

We do it all the time. The veracity of scientific endeavor does not consist in how we convince ourselves of things. We simply take what is at hand, observe it, predict it, record it, and explain it. Science has always found reality to be elusive. That's pretty much how it is with God, too.

would like to see a proposal from creationists for a methodology that would enable us to include the supernatural in science.

I would like to see a proposal from evolutionists that would enable us to distinguish the natural from the supernatural. As it is science dismisses the supernatural altogether and thinks it is free to represent objective reality. Semantically, everything that exists can be explained one way or the other.

[mlc9852]

You are free to if you wish. A lot of people do.

[tortoise]

The God-O-meter, you silly.

The Scientologists have something similar, but better.

[andysandmikesmom]

I did not say science cant seek to discover if God exists...

I am curious as to why you would want proof that God exists...that was the intent of my question...

I am content to believe in God, I dont need any proof...

If something exists, why cant it be discovered?...Why doesnt it occur to you, that God in His existence, chooses not to be discovered by the means which earthly man has at his disposal...that we must take His existence on faith..

[ml1954]

Your permission is not required.

[mlc9852]

I believe in God by faith. But it would be nice to show atheists something that would prove God exists.

[b_sharp]

OK then. I'll assume your verson of truth, at least in this context, is that the Bible is innerrent, literal and complete. If this is the case, the answer to your question is no. There are far too many inconsistencies between the Bible and the geological record to accept the Bible as a perfect record of a world wide flood event.

[RogueIsland]

Challenge: I would like to see a proposal from creationists for a methodology that would enable us to include the supernatural in science.

How about we use the ID approach: "I don't understand how this could be natural, therefore it is obviously and conclusively supernatural. Next!"

[PatrickHenry]

[The God-O-meter, you silly] The Scientologists have something similar, but better.

The Amazing Online God-O-Meter.

[dread78645]

The Scientologists have something similar, but better.

So -- XenuDidit?

[blowfish]

I just don't get it. If you evolutionists are so darn certain, why are you so scared of intelligent design.

We're scared of ignorance on the march, proudly waving it's banner...

[mlc9852]

Well, I appreciate your honest opinion.

[mlc9852]

When you say "natural", exactly what do you mean?

[metmom]

Let's face it, in however many threads about evolution there have been, does anyone think someone has changed their opinion on the topic?

Of course not! And nobody is ever going to have their opinion changed once it deteriorates into name calling. And just for the record, I'm not at all saying that the evos are doing it all. I've been embarrassed by some of what has come out of the creation camp. I know that baiting goes on from both sides, too.

[mlc9852]

So if someone disagrees with you, they're ignorant?