answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer
AnswerIntelligent design is not a scientific theory and evolution is. Explanations for questions about our world and everything in it are formed by using the scientific method. First, a scientist would come up with an explanation to an observed reoccurring pattern in nature, this is called a hypothesis. The hypothesis is tested by gathering more data and seeing if the data is supports or falsifies the explanation. If enough data is gathered, the hypothesis can be considered true and it becomes a theory. But even a theory is still subject to being falsified if enough data is found to prove it wrong (falsify). The theory of evolution is supported by data which was collected through observation of patterns and other events in nature. Some people don't like the idea that evolution is talked about in schools, because it contradicts many religious ideas (example: humans are not animals or related to them, the structure of organisms cannot change/evolve to be different and better because they were made perfect in the first place, etc.). So intelligent design was formed; and by calling it 'scientific,' some people thought they could put it in schools without violating the law that religion is not to be taught in schools. Intelligent design is not a theory because it has no data supporting it and there is no data to falsify it. So intelligent design is not a scientific idea, it is more like wishful thinking. AnswerEvolution is a theory that, in very general terms, states that today's species evolved by a process of replication and mutation with natural selection over a long time period from simpler life forms. This is accepted by mainstream scientists as the most likely explanation for our current species. Originally proposed by Charles Darwin, the theory of Evolution has been significantly refined by more modern discoveries in science, in particular the field of genetics and cellular Biology, so the current theory of evolution is often referred to as the 'Modern Evolutionary Synthesis' reflecting the way it has incorporated these new discoveries.

Intelligent Design (ID) asserts that the universe and life forms we see today are best explained by design of an intelligent cause; Some ID proponents do not rule out adaptations of species, but they do not believe the addition of new complex information could have happened naturally. In other words, they believe natural variation within species is possible, but not new species. Both are trying to explain how the world works. Both claim to search for truth. Proponents of each believe they have proposed a theory.

Within science a theory is generally defined as a systematic framework that explains observations and experimental results, and which can be used to make testable predictions which in turn can either be used to refine or falsify the theory. Generally speaking scientists will attempt to test new theories by designing experiments that, if successful, will falsify the theory. All scientific theories and results are considered tentative and subject to revision or refutation as more evidence is gathered.

Scientific explanations for questions about our world and everything in it are formed by using the scientific method. First, a scientist would come up with an explanation to an observed reoccurring pattern in nature, this is called a hypothesis. The hypothesis is tested by gathering more data by observation and experimentation to see if the data supports or falsifies the explanation. If enough data is gathered, the hypothesis can be considered to have been validated and it becomes a theory. But even a theory is still subject to being falsified if enough data is found to prove it wrong. Scientists must publish the results of their experiments, and explain their hypotheses and theories in scientific journals so that other scientists are able to understand their work. It is also important for experiments and theories to be explained in a way that allows other scientists to reproduce the experiments or devise new ones that can either support or falsify the theory. When scientists try to publish their experiments the work must first be peer-reviewed. This is a process where the work they want to be published is reviewed by a selection of other experts in the field (peers) before it is accepted for publication.

The theory of evolution is supported by data which was collected through observation of a wide variety of natural systems and through laboratory experimentation. Most palaeontologists consider the fossil record to provide evidence completely consistent with the theory of evolution and geneticists also consider evidence from the study of genes to also be consistent with evolution. These two separate strands of evidence are also consistent with each other and have been used to successfully make predictions.

Scientists would further argue that Intelligent Design is not a theory because it has no data supporting it and there is no possible way to falsify it. Intelligent Design supporters argue that the evidence to support them is in the inability of current scientific theories to explain how certain features in biological systems came about naturally and that it is impossible for these features to occur naturally so they must therefore be the result of Intelligent Design. Many scientists consider this argument to be invalid and little more than an attempt to insert God, or an Intelligent Designer, into any current gaps in scientific understanding. This is often referred to as the 'God of the gaps' argument. Although the progress of scientific research can constantly fill these gaps in our knowledge this aspect of the Intelligent Design hypothesis could never be falsified because it can always be reapplied where there are still gaps in our understanding.

Some Intelligent design proponents argue that Evolutionary theory is a psuedoscience which lacks any significant empirical evidence to support it whilst others have chosen to argue that Intelligent Design should be taught as a valid alternative to Evolution within science education. Opponents of Intelligent Design argue that it is unsupported by evidence whereas, in their view, the evidence to support Evolution is overwhelming.

The majority of the scientific community have so far rejected Intelligent design as unscientific, amounting to little more than an untested (and some would argue un-testable) hypothesis that has produced no experimental evidence. It should be noted that accepted theories in science can and are overturned when experimental results are published that successfully falsify the prevailing theory.

Evolutionary theory is often criticised for failing to explain the origins of biological life, and that it is a theory that excludes the possibility of a supernatural god, and as such is atheistic in nature. In reality Evolution is explicitly not a theory concerning the origin of life, or the origin of the universe. It assumes the existence of life and is concerned with explaining how these living systems change through successive generations, developing new traits and ultimately creating new species, or as Charles Darwin put it 'the Origin of Species'.

The theory of Evolution within modern science does not explicitly exclude the possibility of an intelligent designer, either as the designer of the first living matter, or of the universe as a whole. Because science is a discipline that attempts to explain observed facts in terms of measurable physical reality it does not allow supernatural entities as part of its explanations or theories because they are incompatible with the scientific method, even if they actually exist. Many scientists have supernatural or religious beliefs but they do not rely on them when using scientific methods to understand the world. Some evolutionary scientists believe in a form of supernatural origin or intelligent design to the universe and that the mechanism of evolution was designed to do precisely what scientists observe it to do.

Each of these proposed theories starts with presuppositions. Evolutionary Theory and other scientific theories begin by assuming that everything we can observe and measure can be explained in terms of natural processes. ID assumes that supernatural design is possible and that its effects can be observed. ID scientists do not challenge the idea of change over time in organisms -just that the addition of certain complex biological information proposed by evolution is impossible without the intervention of an intelligent designer.

AnswerEvolution is a scientific theory. Intelligent design is not. Evolution, at least as it is presented in modern evolutionary synthesis, is fact, and is presented as such. Intelligent design is a religiously spawned doctrine that has social and political aims or goals as its objectives. Supporters of intelligent design present the oddest assortment of ideas as regards scientific support for accepting intelligent design as something scientific. The major scientific organizations around the globe uniformly and categorically reject it as unscientific.
User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Are intelligent design and evolution scientific theories?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Biology

What are the evidence presented in court for Charles Darwin theory of intelligent design?

Not sure how to answer this as scientific theories are not subject to the law but are supported by overwhelming evidence. The only time that evolution or the theory that supports it is in a court of law is when some public school somewhere, or some state somewhere tries to introduce religion into the classroom disguised inder the terms creation " science : or intelligent design.There is no theory of evolution put forward by Charles Darwin that includes intelligent design. If fact the theory of evolution by natural selection is the antithesis of intelligent design.


Is there a credible scientific theory that opposes evolution?

The argument against the theory of evolution is Creation ex-nihilo ['out of nothing'] by God, sometimes called the Intelligent Design, or ID, theory. = =


Does intelligent design challenge the theory of evolution?

No. Intelligent Design is not a viable theory since it does not explain all of the steps nor provide any evidence to substantiate its claims. As a result, the Theory of Evolution remains unchallenged by it.


How does evolution involve creationism?

Evolution does NOT involve creationism.Evolution is a testable and therefore provable explanation as to how the diversity of life on earth has happened.Creationism is a religious viewpoint and therefore a mater of faith.AnswerI agree with the above. Evolution does NOT involve Creationism. Evolution is a branch of biological science and thus rejects "supernatural" claims such as those of Creationism, does not need to consider them. Creationism, often hanging on Genesis, the first book of the Bible, predates scientific inquiry and the scientific method and so is thus rejected by science and thus evolutionary science. In the public spotlight, the so-called Evolution-Creation "controversy" and all the on-stage arguments and debates might make it seem as though Evolution and Creationism (and Intelligent Design) have a lot to do with one another, but I doubt Creationism gets much mention at all in scientific laboratories and scientific conferences (it can't because it hasn't got anything to say about the real world.)


How should scientists respond to the Intelligent Design movement?

Intelligent design is not creationism or other religious hogwash. It has much scientific evidence. Scientists need to see Intelligent Design as another theory, another viable explanation for how the earth came into being and influenced how it is today. They should support their fellow scientists working on Intelligent Design.AnswerScientists are well-studied, well-knowledged researchers. They study biology and chemistry and geology and physics. Science has advanced people through medical and technological and agricultural revolutions.On the other hand, Intelligent Design is not a theory (that can be used to advance humanity like science's theories), but a political movement (which some emphasis on trying to get itself taught in classes in public schools).Not being a theory, and a political movement actually gets in the way of science (particularly when it tries to displace parts of science on school curricula).Intelligent Design is in fact creationism 'in disguise'. Some extreme fundamentalists have even been reported as convincing cancer patients to rather use 'faith healing' rather than their anticancer medicines. This is very dangerous of course.In the case of the world of faiths, whether 'real' creationism, Intelligent Design or other, there is always a foggy area as to where things can go, it just depends on opinion and faith.In the case of science, the theories are as hard and fast as they can be and as correct as they can be at present. And look at how much progress we have made just by science.Intelligent Design at its best is simply a philosophical device that serves the same purpose as creationism. But it doesn't advance the world scientifically at all, since it lives in the realm of faith.Science has most of the answers that Intelligent Design and creationism try to answer, and has good guesses as to what the remaining answers to the mysteries of the Universe might be. Since ID and creationism have failed to provide anything scientific or useful so far, most scientists would have nothing to say about it.There is a problem about ID trying to undermine science education by insinuating itself onto school curricula (it does this politically). And some of its relatives (the fundamentalism mentioned earlier) present problems when they encourage faith as an absolute all-time replacement for important medications.Scientists, and the public, should of course confront these problems.As I had stated earlier Intelligent Design is notcreationism. I believe you are confusing hard core facts with religion. Many scientists working with Intelligent Design have furthered research for mankind, and have made discoveries beneficial to health, astronomy, biology, and other spheres.These extreme fundamentalists that try to convince people to reject modern medicine in favor of supernatural healing sound like preachers, or charismatic Christians I highly doubt any scientist would do something so absurd. If you respond to my argument, I would highly appreciate it if you would send me the article in which this was recorded.Scientific theories are always up for examination. As technology develops so does our knowledge of the world around us. Columbus is an excellent example. Before he returned from his journey to the New World, it was a scientific fact that the world was flat. It was accepted in all scientific circles and was common knowledge for everyday people. Later, when Columbus returned, that fact was placed under scrutiny and finally discarded in favor of a new theory.You stated that science has answers to some questions that Intelligent Design cannot answer, but you fail to recognize that it is the same for evolution. The question of how the earth and life was created is the greatest mystery of all time, and people will argue over it until the end of time. I personally cannot accept the theory of evolution because it seems to be a political issue, like your views of Intelligent Design, and the evidence in its favor seem weak. I would suggest looking at the Cambrian Explosion, which, I believe, is the biggest hole in the evolution theory.America was founded freedom. The first Article of the Constitution states the right of freedom of thought and freedom of speech. I believe that both the theories of Intelligent Design and evolution should be offered to the masses for them to decide. The arguments above prove the fact that there are two very different views with two very different supporters, but that is not a bad thing. In school, you are taught to analyze facts presented to you and form your own opinions, but how are you supposed to do that if only one side of the argument is presented?

Related questions

What are the alternatives of evolution?

There are no scientific theories in competition for the theory of evolution - it is the only credible theory that explains the origin and diversity of the earth's species. . The primary alternate assertion to evolution, especially in the USA, is Creationalism, of which Intelligent Design is one example. Creationalism argues that all living things are the product of a god or an intelligent creator.


What are the evidence presented in court for Charles Darwin theory of intelligent design?

Not sure how to answer this as scientific theories are not subject to the law but are supported by overwhelming evidence. The only time that evolution or the theory that supports it is in a court of law is when some public school somewhere, or some state somewhere tries to introduce religion into the classroom disguised inder the terms creation " science : or intelligent design.There is no theory of evolution put forward by Charles Darwin that includes intelligent design. If fact the theory of evolution by natural selection is the antithesis of intelligent design.


What are current theries that conflict with Darwin's theory what evidence is used to support thses theories?

Intelligent design, Hovind Theory Added: The above are not scientific theories but more ideological assertions in nature. No positive evidence supports either assertion.


Is there a credible scientific theory that opposes evolution?

The argument against the theory of evolution is Creation ex-nihilo ['out of nothing'] by God, sometimes called the Intelligent Design, or ID, theory. = =


What are Arguments against intelligent design behind evolution?

Every argument against evolution falls into several categories. 1.) It could disprove something if it were true, but that something would not be evolution. 2.) There are no arguments for Intelligent design, all they have are arguments against evolution (and sometime plate tectonics, cosmology, mathematics's, or oceanography). 3.) Every single argument made against evolution or any other natural science in defence of intelligent design (also known as creationism as determined by a conservative Christian judge) has been used as an argument against intelligent design and backing up the science that the creationists are trying to ignore. Summary: Take any creationist claim, summarize it, and take the reverse of that and you get the scientific arguments against intelligent design and for evolution.


What are the ratings and certificates for Flock of Dodos The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus - 2006?

Flock of Dodos The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus - 2006 is rated/received certificates of: USA:PG


Does Rick Santorum believe in evolution?

Rick Santorum has expressed skepticism about the theory of evolution and has advocated for the teaching of intelligent design alongside evolution in schools. He has stated his belief that there is credible scientific dissent from the theory of evolution.


What are the release dates for Flock of Dodos The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus - 2006?

Flock of Dodos The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus - 2006 was released on: USA: 2 February 2006 (Kansas City, Missouri)


Does intelligent design challenge the theory of evolution?

No. Intelligent Design is not a viable theory since it does not explain all of the steps nor provide any evidence to substantiate its claims. As a result, the Theory of Evolution remains unchallenged by it.


What are 3 new theories that are being put forth to explain the universe?

I know one of the newer theories is called , intelligent design.


Why do people who believe in Catholicism don't agree with evolution?

It is not forbidden by Catholicism to believe in evolution. The reason many people who believe in a god do not believe in evolution is that evolution's adversary, Intelligent Design, makes far more sense to one who believes in God that anyone who does not, although you can believe in intelligent design and not believe in God.


The intelligent design movement seeks scientific backings for creationism?

The Intelligent Design movement has been seeking scientific backing for creationism since the late twentieth century. Unfortunately for the movement, no such support has been forthcoming, nor is it likely to come, since so-called Intelligent Design is unsupported by facts or evidence.