Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

[the_bob_delusion]

Should we teach both and let the students decide for themselves?

Go

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

And of course, Charles Darwin said that the Australian Aboriginals were NOT AS EVOLVED AS WHITES - so does everyone believe that?

unlike religious faith it is

---

That's the thing about a scientific theory - unlike religious faith it is open to scrutiny and constantly being tested and refined. When Darwin   first proposed his theory of evolution he was venturing into uncharted territory - the amazing thing is not that one of his conclusions has been proved wrong but that the overwhelming majority have been proved absolutely correct. 

[curmu-curmu]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

Still awaiting that proof, Rabbit. Will it be coming anytime soon?

---

Nope.  Because there is none, except if you look around you, there is proof of intelligent design everywhere.

The things that you see, and say 'that must have evolved' from xyz through millions of years of accidental gene/chemical/environmenal changes / manipulations, I see another wonder of an Intelligen Designer.

---

Seriously? Is that the very best you can offer?

"Look around you. There's proof of intelligent design everywhere". Truly an argument worthy of a creationist!

[curmu-curmu]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

And of course, Charles Darwin said that the Australian Aboriginals were NOT AS EVOLVED AS WHITES - so does everyone believe that?

unlike religious faith it is

---

That's the thing about a scientific theory - unlike religious faith it is open to scrutiny and constantly being tested and refined. When Darwin   first proposed his theory of evolution he was venturing into uncharted territory - the amazing thing is not that one of his conclusions has been proved wrong but that the overwhelming majority have been proved absolutely correct. 

---

And sadly for creationists, every tenet, and I do mean every one, has been thoroughly dispelled and proven incorrect time and again - but the old saying is just so apt with creationists - 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!'

Or in the case of creationists, 'you can lead a creationist to evidence, but you can't make him think!'

[the_great_she_elephant]

In fact there is a good deal of proof that design is not intelligent; And the reason for this is that unlike a creator, evolution cannot go back to the drawing board to make improvements. It has to work with whatever is already there. Which is why we humans have to put up with a spine, which, if it was 'designed' at all, must have been designed for quadrupeds.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

And of course, Charles Darwin said that the Australian Aboriginals were NOT AS EVOLVED AS WHITES - so does everyone believe that?

unlike religious faith it is

---

That's the thing about a scientific theory - unlike religious faith it is open to scrutiny and constantly being tested and refined. When Darwin   first proposed his theory of evolution he was venturing into uncharted territory - the amazing thing is not that one of his conclusions has been proved wrong but that the overwhelming majority have been proved absolutely correct. 

---

And sadly for creationists, every tenet, and I do mean every one, has been thoroughly dispelled and proven incorrect time and again - but the old saying is just so apt with creationists - 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!'

Or in the case of creationists, 'you can lead a creationist to evidence, but you can't make him think!'

---

OK. I have never seen any of these proofs, so please show me some. Just one example.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

In fact there is a good deal of proof that design is not intelligent; And the reason for this is that unlike a creator, evolution cannot go back to the drawing board to make improvements. It has to work with whatever is already there. Which is why we humans have to put up with a spine, which, if it was 'designed' at all, must have been designed for quadrupeds.

---

Exactly. Evolution / mutation is a downhill process. Things don't evolve legs where there were none, arms where there were none - mutations are detrimental - ie things are lost not gained - eyes in fish that no longer see light due to depth of water etc, LOSE their eyes / vision because they are not needed.

Fish DON'T grow legs to evade predators, as I have been told by David Attenborough (sp) in his otherwise excellent programs.

[joz*garage]

sure, only in that ..wonder and imagination was part of the evolution of the mind

[the_great_she_elephant]

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

I don't see how you can confuse them. They are totally separate concepts

. Many Christians believe in evolution, but not in abiogenesis. i.e they believe God created some form of microbial life, which over billions of years evolved into all the species we see today.

Most scientistshowever, do believe in abiogenesis i.e. that life originally arose from nonliving matter. and over billions of years evolved into all the species we see today.

[curmu-curmu]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

And of course, Charles Darwin said that the Australian Aboriginals were NOT AS EVOLVED AS WHITES - so does everyone believe that?

unlike religious faith it is

---

That's the thing about a scientific theory - unlike religious faith it is open to scrutiny and constantly being tested and refined. When Darwin   first proposed his theory of evolution he was venturing into uncharted territory - the amazing thing is not that one of his conclusions has been proved wrong but that the overwhelming majority have been proved absolutely correct. 

---

And sadly for creationists, every tenet, and I do mean every one, has been thoroughly dispelled and proven incorrect time and again - but the old saying is just so apt with creationists - 'you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!'

Or in the case of creationists, 'you can lead a creationist to evidence, but you can't make him think!'

---

OK. I have never seen any of these proofs, so please show me some. Just one example.

---

You know, I'd really like to do just that, but given the penchant for creationists to blindly ignore any evidence that contradicts their preconcieved notions and christian beliefs, I'd be just wasting my time.

If you really, and I do mean really, wanted to see proof of evolution, it's not that hard to google it. Try googling 'ring species' for a start.

But then again, THAT would require an open mind - and creationists are known unequivocally for their closed-mindedness.

I've had these arguments before in other places, and observed time and again, that evidence against creationism is summarily dismissed by them every time - so futile exercises are not my forte. Also factor in that I'm no scientist, but find accepting the proofs of evolution is far more palatable than a magical skydaddy!

[curmu-curmu]