To all supporters of intelligent design:

[spyfish7]

Empirical evidence my ass.
I want to see your f.ing data.
Tell me, how DO you measure the intelligent designer?
RAWR.

Comments

[drscotto]

There's a difference between arguing that and presenting critical evidence of evolution.

There is GOOD evidence that contradicts Darwin's 150 + year old theory of evolution. NO THEORY ever holds up for that long in the scientific community. Good scientists know that. Not unless it's 1. made up or 2. used to explain the unexplainable.

My point is that you people who are made at Kansas should not be mad at what they have passed, but you should be taking the stand on what they are going to teach in their class. Teaching critical responses to evolution based on scientific fact IS a good idea, but using this as a way to promote religion is a BAD idea.

Oh... Happy Birthday!

[petrovnik]

debates within the scientific community tend to center on the mechanisms of evolution, not against natural selection as a general operating principle. and even so, intelligent design is not one of those viable competing scientific theories.

looking at who the supporters of this decision are, it is clear that the Kansas episode is directly related to intelligent design, which has no scientific grounding whatsoever. i am in agreement that it is appropriate to teach the debate. the problem is that most ID supporters don't seem to actually understand what the scientific debate is about in the first place.

[drscotto]

I agree with you. Completely. Kansas is not getting it right here, but it is a step. They can teach the debate in science class - the actual debate over the mechanisms - and create a theology class for intelligent design if they want.

[spyfish7]

Actually, I wasn't talking about Kansas specifically, just the debate in general.
Intelligent design should not be a part of any science curriculum. It is not science.
The debate is another issue. There is much debate over Darwin's theory within the scientific community, but these arguments are being studied and investigated through the scientific method (which CANNOT be applied to ID). Actually, I am a supporter of one such hypothesis...damn, it's windy outside...but I also recognize that some aspects of Darwin's theory explain the existence of life at present and the biodiversity we observe on Earth.

[drscotto]

Werd.

But ID could be taught in say, a theology class.

[timotheophany]

Thank you. Did you see my post about this?

http://timotheophany.livejournal.com/489600.html