If creationists want intelligent design taught along side evolution, then why stop there?

I don’t know why this question was deleted but i will try again.

Why not teach astrology along with astronomy or alchemy along with chemistry… why not even teach magic along side physics?

Most Christians I know don’t want biblical creationism taught in science classes (they would butcher it, and then there’s the argument about all the other creation stories being taught). What we want is for microbes-to-man evolution to be taught with all its warts—in most states, they are not even allowed to present evidence that would put evolution in a poor light. And we want Intelligent Design to at least be mentioned (with teachers free to discuss it without fear of being sacked). Unlike alchemy, storks bringing babies, a flat earth, etc., a significant percentage of the (tax paying) population believes in ID (which is agnostic regarding the source of design and encompasses every “creation” story). See the New World Encyclopedia entry on Intelligent Design: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entr…

Good science teaching should include controversies. But, whenever you mention this kind of stuff, Darwinists jump from their trees and start behaving as if someone had stolen their bananas. Apparently, academic freedom is for other subjects. At the moment, educators are in the interesting position of not teaching students, but instead conditioning them to recite the “correct” answers without a second thought to other possible explanations. Today’s science education does not sufficiently emphasize inquiry-based learning.

What are the Darwinists afraid of? A little critical analysis never hurt anyone who had the evidence on their side. The Darwinists worship their idol but don’t listen to him. He said, “A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question…” (Charles Darwin, Origin of Species).

Evolutionists typically claim that the evidence for modern Darwinism is “overwhelming.” But they act as if they know the evidence is so shaky that the slightest whiff of open discussion will topple the theory. And if high school students are capable of understanding the arguments and evidence for modern evolutionary theory, then they should be able to understand (and rationally discuss) scientific criticisms of modern evolutionary theory.

Dr. Philip Skell, “Intellectual freedom is fundamental to the scientific method. Learning to think creatively, logically and critically is the most important training that young scientists can receive. Encouraging students to carefully examine the evidence for and against neo-Darwinism, therefore, will help prepare students not only to understand current scientific arguments, but also to do good scientific research” (Open Letter to the South Carolina Education Oversight Committee).

Because Intellgent design is only considered a THEORY by all sane men, same as evolution. Darwin even stated in his book that if anything came along to disprove his theory, he completely agrees with it. Intelligent design is not a looney theory that tries to break all laws of physics because we live in an era of disbelief and primitism, even though there is only a little evidence to support it. But, as with all theories in science, if there is no evidence to disprove it, it is a perfectly rational theory. There is absolutley no proof that wormholes exist, the only reason they are given any rational thought is because the laws of physics don’t disprove their existence. All I’m trying to get at is that as of right now there is nothing disproving we were designed by some higher force. For all we know, we might be beings in a small space being observed by larger lifeforms or sentient programs in a computer simulation. You must be open minded to the possibilities as science states that nothing can ever be certain.

(PS. The reason that this was deleted, as I am guessing you probably know, is because some people, whether or not you choose to believe it, find this an offensive comment. It challenges their deeply held personal beliefs and states that they are wrong, stupid, ignorant, and that someone somewhere is better than them. If I told you that you are an idiot for thinking that everything you ever thought to be true was false and only brainless chimps would believe that and that my beliefs are superior to yours, I’m sure it would offend you. Think about it before questioning something held so dear by so many people.)

Your question is really very absurd. Intelligent Design and Creationism are two totally different things!! You need to read a science book, my friend. ID does not talk about “GOD” or “Gods” or anything in particular, heck it could even be “aliens” or and alien DNA having traveled the world and “seeded” the planet with life…
There are actually quite a LOT of very well respected scientists who prescribe to the theory of ID, and many of them are not in favor of “creationism” necessarily, or are even religious, per se.

ID is a very valid theory and has quite a lot of scientific evidence that makes it a valid theory, as valid as one might say the theory of macro-evolution is. Therefore, ID should be taught alongside macro-evolutionary theory.

Creationism should NOT be taught in public schools, as the church and state need to remain separated, and no one should be forced to learn about a particular religion, except in the context of social sciences and culture studies, where all religions and cultures are looked at objectively within the context of broadening the horizons of students and teaching children about the world and the various people in it.

Alchemy is nonsense, magic doesn’t exist, and astrology is not fact-based… these things don’t belong in a science class and you’re really showing your ignorance of the facts here. Instead of having a knee-jerk reaction against ID simply because you don’t believe in GOD, why don’t you do some research with an open mind and then you can have an educated opinion!!

First, most true Creationists disagree with intelligent design, and hold to a six day creation, by supernatural means. ID leans toward genetic engineering, by unknown intelligence(s), and over vast time.

Creationists who wish to discredit evolution exist. But ‘actual’ ID proponents, and the ID hypothesis is far more in evidence than natural causation, do not rely on bogus sources, but on rational and unbiased analysis of the data. Further, they do not deny evolution in toto, just its functional mechanism.

In addition, as the questioner has proposed, including ‘pseudo sciences’ as coursework is a common ploy by ID critics as well. But to conflate a competing hypothesis [ID] to natural causation as pseudo science (astrology, alchemy) is not a valid comparison, since the design hypothesis is based on the existence of non-evolvable complexity, rather than on a magical poof scenario, or made-up science.

By the way, Annette stated the anwer to the question far better than I have just done.

I am a Creationist and a scientist and I have never asked I.D. not creation to be taught in school.

It would be enough that the truth about evolution be taught.

Since these are very fundamental situations requiring answers that make sense, a person’s life can be affected by what they believe. It is not so with the other points you raised.
Kind regards, Günter

I don’t care if intelligent design is taught in school or not. Wise Christian parents will always safeguard their children, telling them about God, and about the bible, and warn their children that out in the world, and this includes school (if they are unfortunate enough to have to go to a public school that is), you’re going to hear opposing points of view.

well along time ago magic and alchemy was taught like a science but times change.I think it would be cool but there would be to many bible pounders trying to call it satanism

Why does Christianity get preference? Why don’t they teach Hindu creation stories? Or Native American creation stories?

Because it was never about ‘giving young people the right to choose’. It is about proselitysing at the government’s expense – which is illegal.

It’s only a poor analogy if you believe creationist garbage. Creationism is in no way widely accepted by the scientific community, and to teach it as science… is criminal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *