How Does Intelligent Design Theory have a *Practical Use* in Life Sciences?

Question

Was was kinda thinking this over and set up a classroom situation were the teacher didn't want to teach intelligent design in his science class, eventually I came to this wonderfully interesting question.

Answer 1

Science is about proof.  Religion is about faith--which by definition is believing what cannot be proven.  I don't see how "intelligent design" (which is basically non-denomiational religion) can be made to fit the scientific model.

Answer 2

No.  Intelligent Design has no *practical use* because it has no *explanatory power*.

Consider two possible explanations for flu viruses:

A. Viruses are the product of evolution.  They mutate and change over time in response to their environment.  Because they continue to evolve, they can develop new proteins in their protein coats or infection mechanisms that allow them to adapt to antivirals.

B.  Viruses are the product of intelligent design.  Some designer, using mechanisms we do not understand, and for reasons we cannot detect, has created both humans and viruses *in their current form*.

Which explanation, A or B, is a better explanation for why we need a new flu shot every year?  Or why some viruses only affect one species and not another (say humans, but not lab rats), while others do infect across species (because the species share features in their immune response that the viruses can adapt to).

Which explanation, A or B, explains both why viruses exist and why humans have immune systems to fight them?   Why would an intelligent designer design both sides of an endless battle between immune systems and diseases, sometimes won by the immune system, sometimes by the disease?   When one defeats the other, is that evidence that the other had "unintelligent design"?

Which explanation, A or B, has more *Practical Use* in the development of antivirals, or flu shots, inocculations, vaccinations, treatments, etc.?  

Which explanation, A or B, has more *Practical Use* in predicting where next year's flu epidemics may develop, and types of traits we may be dealing with?

The problem with explanation B is that it it doesn't actually *EXPLAIN* anything!  It tells us nothing about the virus, or how it works, what it infects, why it changes over time, or how it spreads.  The "Intelligent Design" explanation treats all organisms as separate, unconnected entities that share no origins at all ... they all just appeared *IN THEIR CURRENT FORM* ... for no apparent reason, and with no known mechanism.

The Intelligent Design concept would have us believe that all viruses on the planet already contain in their genomes, immunity to every flu shot, vaccination, or antiviral that will ever be invented by man ... including ones that we haven't invented yet!   Either that, or the Intelligent Designer is deliberately "redesigning" the flu virus every year to thwart human medicine, and keep infecting and killing people.  *HOW* is the Intelligent Designer doing that, and *WHY*, are not questions that Intelligent Design even attempts to answer.  

By conrast, answer A, evolution, holds that viruses and all living organisms came into being through a process of relentless *CHANGE*.   That explains why viruses can adapt to their environment (including the medicine that man throws at it).   That explains why all organisms are related, and why viruses and bacteria can infect things ... because we share the same *BASIC* DNA-replication legacy.  That explains why other species (like lab rats) sometimes can and sometimes cannot be used as predictors for how diseases affect us.

It is scientists understanding of *evolution* that saves countless lives.  Intelligent Design has not helped one speck in this effort.

Answer 3

The practical uses could come from finding the common denominators in all "intelligently designed" parts of this world.   DNA is an interesting concept - all life has DNA and has commonality - how could that have happened through a "boom" in the universe?   A creator created the boom and used all the same materials to create everything - just put things together differently.

It is like cooking - take 5 ingredients - use 4 in one dish, 3 in another, 2 in another and all 5 in yet another.  You can come up with many very different tasting and looking dishes, yet, they all have common ingredients.   Same concept.

Good luck.