<p><a href=“http://www.livescience.com/history/top10_intelligent_designs.html[/url]”>The Top 10 Intelligent Designs (or Creation Myths) | Live Science;
<p>read the different stories…pretty interesting</p>
<p>So whose FAITH do we teach as science?</p>
<p>Have you actually read anything by a proponent of ID? They do not push religion. They simply look at the evidence and ask whether there is evidence of design, rather than random chance, in the natural world. They are scientists who study the data and try to come up with logical conclusions. They simply reach different conclusions from those reached by evolutionists. There is no need to teach any faith at all when discussing ID. It simply asks whether there might be some kind of intelligence behind nature. It could be God, the Force, or whatever. ID is NOT, repeat NOT creationism.</p>
<p>Citygirlsmom,</p>
<p>Here is another list of ten myths you might want to consider:</p>
<p>Myth 1: If the majority of liberals believe something to be true, and they repeat a mantra frequently enough in a sarcastic tone, then it is true, independent of physical reality.</p>
<p>Myth 2: The universe somehow created itself out of randomness and nothing. However, in order to get around this obvious limitation, some liberals use philosophical nonsense such as there is no problem here. The universe did not really have a beginning, because both time and space were created at the same time/place. This was just a singularity in the time-space continuum.</p>
<p>Myth 3: Liberals criticizing the Bible, never having read it, are erudite, whereas evangelical Christians who point out flaws in any scientific theory are necessarily hypocritical, bone-headed and wrong.</p>
<p>Myth 4: Any theory that is accepted by the majority of public school teachers or even of college biology professors must necessarily be true in totality and is beyond criticism.</p>
<p>Myth 5: The vast majority of the worlds premier scientists are / have been atheists.</p>
<p>Myth 6: Fame and brilliance are equivalent. Therefore, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and Charles Darwin and among the handful of the most brilliant scientists of all time, and hence their opinions on all topics should be accepted as fact.</p>
<p>Myth 7: When liberals use phrases such as studies show or scientists believe without any detailed citations, the subsequent statements must be accepted as fact. Any suggestion that there may be other studies (or even most studies) that show the opposite trend must necessarily be fallacious, argumentative, and bigoted.</p>
<p>Myth 8: Assuming that God does not exist in order to prove that God does not exist is rigorous logic. All religion, however, is inherently illogical, especially when its principles are consistent with human behavior, sin, science, etc.</p>
<p>Myth 9: The Bible claims that microevolution cannot take place, and hence all evangelical (Bible-believing) Christians are necessarily non-scientific.</p>
<p>Myth 10: Since Gods hand in creating the universe according to a specific religion text (e.g. Genesis) cannot be proven/disproven using scientific principles, then it is necessarily false.</p>
<p>Nice, pafather. Although I wish you would choose a word besides “liberal,” since I am a liberal, too… :-)</p>
<p>If it is not God, then what is ID? The tooth fairy. Please, it is another way of calling saying Creationism.</p>
<p>So, if it is God, and God is not logical, than ID can’t be logical. </p>
<p>If you believe in ID, how old is the Earth? </p>
<p>So, are you saying if we can’t yet figure out how it call came about, we are to credit your God?</p>
<p>CGM:
Is that the extent of your personal examination of our existence? God, the tooth fairy, or nothing? What does the age of the earth–scientifically verifiable, within the limits of our own epsistemology and scientific methods–have to do with the existence–or not–of intelligent design? It’s irrelevant!
Once again, no. No one said or implied any such thing. The notion that some sentient force put life as we know it into motion simply suggests that there may be more to the universe than mere humans. Or the tooth fairy. Or cosmic accident. I fail to understand why this is so threatening to some.</p>
<p>Why do you care what I believe…I don’t mix science and religion. </p>
<p>Call ID what it is and don’t hide behind fancy names. THat is a shield for teaching a Faith system as science.</p>
<p>Because it is not SCIENCE…it is FAITH…and to teach it as FACT is not something that should be taught in school. It is RELIGION. ANd to try and disguise it as such is lying.</p>
<p>And the age of the Earth has a lot to do with it. Many people that believe in Creationism claim the Earth is not very old, and those same people push ID. The connection is there. If the Earth is very old, then things evolved. If it is much younger, it was all made by a plan.</p>
<p>So, how old do you think the Earth is? It is very relevant and very connected.</p>
<p>And to claim ID is not religion is a joke. It is. And I have no problem with religion, faith, beliefs, but it is not science. And should not be taught as science. </p>
<p>Than what is ID to you? If not God? Explain that to me.</p>
<p>To me, the concept of intelligent design is a school of thought that, having examined accepted science, finds that Darwinism, while persuasive science, fails to explain the origins of life (it explains its evolution). Have life forms evolved? Certainly, IMO. Does that obviate questions into the ultimate conundrum of what started it all? Certainly not. And, once again, for the hard of reading: No one that I know thinks ID should be taught as science. It’s no more a religion than reading and discussing Aristotle is a religion.</p>
<p>For the record, I accept current estimates of the earth’s age at around 8 billion years (or whatever the scientists think it is). Your question itself demonstrates that you have confused creationism with ID. It’s that simple.</p>
<p>Susantm, Sorry. You are right. I should have said un-scientific atheists</p>
<p>CGM, “I don’t mix science and religion.” Sorry, but atheism is a religion.</p>
<p>I never said I was an athiest. </p>
<p>What does this Intelligent Designer look like? What form does it take? What did it make? and design…some say the IDer did not create everything, some say it did…which is it? what parts? Does the IDer create disease, create mutant genes, make mistakes? </p>
<p>Whose ID is it- was it the Adam and Eve one, or the Giant Turtle one, or the Norse Myth?</p>
<p>Isn’t ID based on religious faith, please show me how it is not</p>
<p>So where should ID be taught? In what context?</p>
<p>I am an atheist- but atheism isn’t a religion it is an absence of theism.</p>
<p>No one yet has talked about all the things we used to believe that we know have scientific answers for…all the things we placed at God’s door that have chemical answers for…why just stop and say,well since we don’t know (as people did thousands of years ago when we thought the Earth was the center and the sun circled the earth and the Sun was in fact a God) so we will say it is a higher being. Would you have wanted scientist to not look for atoms, and cells, and into space? Noone even imagined atoms and quarks and protons and electrons and yet, they have been discovered. We still don’t know everything about how everything works, but we know more than we ever have. But to just say, well, since we haven’t YET figured it all out, lets just say IDers made it all. </p>
<p>People for years learned about three dimensions, but scientists now believe there are many more. </p>
<p>So, please tell me, what was the IDers plan…was there more than one? Was it a IDers that created good and evil as well? Do we have free will? If this is to be taught in school as how humankind came about, please, tell me was this IDers good, evil, neutral…</p>
<p>The first in depth decription of ID was given by Aristotle, a few hundred years before your nemisis, Jesus claimed divinity and gave his life.</p>
<p>Aristotle did not believe in a personal god, he believed in a first cause, ID requires nothing else. Relax. Chill…the barbarians are not at the gate: there are no barbarians, there are only good people that you disagree with on this point.</p>
<p>But is it SCIENCE? I really don’t care about ID unless it is taught as SCIENCE!!!</p>
<p>Teach it in philosophy, teach it as myth, teach it in church, but science?</p>
<p>citygirlsmom, I am afraid you do not understand ID at all. It is NOT NOT NOT creationism. It does NOT propose that the earth is just a few thousand years old. It is NOT a God of the gaps theory. It does not even deny that evolution occurs. It does NOT state who or what the designer, if there is one, looks like or what one’s religious faith should be. That is for each individual to decide for him/herself.</p>
<p>ID is simply a methodology for studying the natural world to see if there is evidence of design. It is using the scientific method to study nature without adding in the preconception that there could be no outside intelligence involved. Evolution will not even consider the possibility of God, while ID leaves that possibility open. If science is really looking for truth, why must it close out the possibility of God and not even allow it as a consideration?</p>
<p>
Again, CGM, you seem to be off on a very different page. Nothing about ID in those examples.</p>
<p>CGM,</p>
<p>“But is it SCIENCE?” </p>
<p>Yes. YOU are the only one who has associated ID with various myths, which have nothing to do with ID or any other science.</p>
<p>“I really don’t care about ID unless it is taught as SCIENCE!!!”</p>
<p>Please correct my ignorance with regard to why ID is not scientific. For example, what specifically is UNSCIENTIFIC about calculating mathematical probabilities of matter having evolved into the world we know it today over billions of years, based on different stated assumptions (and limited by the laws of physics)?</p>
<p>Answer my question please, where is it to be taught, if the President of the United States says it should be taught, where EXACTLY do you see it as being taught?</p>
<p>ID implies a God and to claim otherwise is denying what ID means.</p>
<p>The president didn’t say that anything in particular should be taught. Prove me wrong. I’ve said before that I think ID is primarily a philosophical question. Philosophy has a place in science…in fact, for many years, science was considered to be a philosophy. And mathematics was considered to be the ultimate philosphy, as it was practically the only thing that could be proven to be true. However, if a student in a science class wants to press the question of where did it all come from, why would anyone find that threatening?</p>