Should Intelligent Design be taught in school, along with the Theory of Evolution?

Question

It is obvious that there are holes in the Theory of Evolution. Evolution is a process that never ends (i.e. people today are slightly taller on average then people were 100 years ago), so, since monkeys evolved into humans.. there should be monkeys out there in every stage of evolution. This is why Big Foot is called The Missing Link, and evolution is called the THEORY of evolution. With that being said, doesn't it seem more logical to teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in schools.. especially since we stress that children should choose for themselves?

Answer 1

As someone who actually understands biological evolution and its evidence, structure and mathematics, I assure you that you have no business questioning what we should teach and should not.  There are 0 holes in evolution, you misuse the word theory and even if you do it still furthers nothing in your argument.  

So either learn about how everything actually works, and not by studying big foot, or don't sit there and postulate about why ID should be taught.

Answer 2

If the holes are so "obvious" ... why is evolution still accepted by as much as 99.85% of the scientific community as the bedrock theory of modern biology?

Can you point to *ANY* "hole" in evolution recoginzed by reputable scientific sources?  (And please don't point to Dr. Dino, or the Discovery Institute ... I said a *reputable* science sources.)

Remember ... you said "obvious."

>"This is why Big Foot is called The Missing Link"

??? By *WHOM*?   This is just rubbish.   Where on earth are you getting your science facts?

>"especially since we stress that children should choose for themselves?"

No we don't!   Do children get to "choose for themselves" whether to believe the earth is flat ... or whether the sun goes around the sun ... or whether the speed of light is constant?

Do children get to "choose for themselves" whether 1+1 = 5?  Or whether a triangle can have four sides?  Or whether the value of pi is 3?

Do children get to "choose for themselves" whether Apollo 11 landed on the moon?  Or whether Paris is the capital of Equador?  Or whether 9/11 was ordered by George Bush?  Or whether the holocaust occurred?

Where on earth do people get the idea that education is about "choosing for yourself" what is accepted science, or accepted mathematics, or accepted history?



The fact is that Intelligent Design has practically zero support in the scientific community as a valid science.

So why would you teach something *AS SCIENCE* that almost no professional scientist takes seriously?

If you are unable to convince even a fraction of 1% of the scientific community that Intelligent Design is valid science ... then you have no business calling it a "scientific theory" worthy of being taught to 10th-GRADERS!!!

Answer 3

I don't have a problem with intelligent design being taught in school, but not as  Science. It should be taught as Religious Studies or Social Studies along with other social phenomena.

Answer 4

you could just teach students about the holes in the theory and let them to decide(whether or not they believe in evolution)  for themselves.

Answer 5

Most Christians I know don't want biblical creationism taught in science classes (they would butcher it). What we want is for molecules-to-man evolution to be taught with all its warts (they are not even allowed to present evidence that would put evolution in a poor light).  And we want intelligent design to at least to be presented.  Unlike leprechauns and a flat earth, etc., a significant percentage of the (tax paying) population believes in ID.

So many people these days are confusing biblical creationism with intelligent design.  "Intelligent Design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as the result of intelligence" (Dr. William Dembski). That's it; it says nothing of who the creator is and how he/she/it/they did it. Intelligent Design encompasses every "creation" story, even aliens seeding life on this planet (directed panspermia).  The God of the Bible is just one possible candidate.  Some creationists (like those at Answers In Genesis) don’t like the ID movement because they say it divorces the Creator from the creation.

What about teaching ID in school?  Whatever you may think of George Bush, he was right in this: "Both sides ought to be properly taught so people can understand what the debate is about.  Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought . . . You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes.”  

Good science teaching should include controversies.  But, whenever you mention this kind of stuff, evolutionists jump from their trees and start behaving as if someone had stolen their bananas.  Apparently, academic freedom is for other subjects.

As Cal Thomas has said, “Why are believers in one model—evolution—seeking to impose their faith on those who hold that there is scientific evidence which supports the other model?  It’s because they fear they will lose their influence and academic power base after a free and open debate.  They are like political dictators who oppose democracy, fearing it will rob them of power.”

Here is a brief overview of the scientific case for ID: http://www.arn.org/docs/positivecaseford...

And for those who put so much faith in peer-review, check this out: http://www.discovery.org/a/2640

Here is a growing list of scientists who signed “A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism”: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/...