0
How should scientists respond to the Intelligent Design movement?
Agreywood12dec
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.
Answer
Scientists 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?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
5 What are some of the design features of the termite mounds that make them very special and intelligent?
What are some of the design features of the termite mounds that make them very special and intelligent? What are some of the design features of the termite mounds that make them very special and intelligent?
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 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.
A DNA molecule has a unique design that resembles a spiral staircase Scientists call this design a?
A Double Helix.
Are intelligent design and evolution scientific theories?
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.
How do scientists respond to the intelligent design movement?
Most scientists reject it out-of-hand as disguised Creationism.The main premise of Intelligent Design is that there are some anatomical structures which cannot have developed by Natural Selection.Scientists in the field usually respond by explaining that there are no such features and what is described as 'Irreducibly Complex' could have evolved by natural selection.
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.
When was Centre for Intelligent Design created?
Centre for Intelligent Design was created in 2010.
When was The Intelligent Design Of... created?
The Intelligent Design Of... was created on 2006-07-25.
When was Intelligent Design - book - created?
Intelligent Design - book - was created in 1999-10.
What is the purpose of the fsm movement?
it is a rhetoric device to prove how stupid intelligent design is. may we all be touched by his noodly appendages, Ramen!
Is intelligent design capitalized?
In a religious context, Intelligent Design would normally be capitalised. On the other hand if I told an engineer that his new invention is an intelligent design, this usage would not be capitalised.
In what year was intelligent design thought of?
Barbara Forrest describes the intelligent design movement as beginning in 1984 when Jon A. Buell's religious organisation the Foundation for Thought and Ethics published The Mystery of Life's Origin by creationist and chemist Charles Thaxton. The idea for intelligent design came about because the United States courts rejected the teaching of creationism, and then 'creation science', as science in the school syllabus. The proponents of intelligent design hoped that the courts would accept intelligent design as a suitable topic for a science course, taught alongside, or instead of, evolution.For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Are there any creation scientists that are not Christian?
Certainly; other religions also have creation theories. The Intelligent Design (ID) theory, which is regarded by some to be of Christian origin is specifically criticized by the creation science movement for being specifically silent on the issue of who did the intelligent designing. Thus, some of its proponents may not be Christian, at least not in the orthodox sense, or they are not prepared to state their position (which is certainly their right).
What does the church think of intelligent design?
A few years ago, some members of the creationism movement adopted the name 'intelligent design' in an attempt to persuade the United States courts that not only was creationism science but that its advocates were neutral as to who the 'intelligent designer' was. Some creationists, who would otherwise be supportive of the Intelligent Design movement, are bitterly opposed to Intelligent Design because they resist any hypothesis that does not clearly and unambiguously put God at the centre of creation.Among the churches, there are different views on this so-called Intelligent Design. For example:In the Catholic Church, Pope Benedict has refused to endorse "intelligent design", instead backing "theistic evolution" which considers that God created life through evolution with no clash between religion and science. The position of the Catholic Church is in favour of the Theory of Evolution, not the obviously artificial construct of Intelligent Design.The Episcopal Church has said that the theory of evolution does not conflict with Christian faith. In 2006, the General Convention affirmed, via Resolution A129, that God is creator and added that "the theory of evolution provides a fruitful and unifying scientific explanation for the emergence of life on earth, that many theological interpretations of origins can readily embrace an evolutionary outlook, and that an acceptance of evolution is entirely compatible with an authentic and living Christian faith." This leaves no room for Intelligent Design.For more information on the background of the Intelligent Design movement, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Are there any valid arguments that support intelligent design?
An increasingly large percentage of modern scientists believe in an intelligent designer of the universe and life, and this is now an established one way trend. To understand why this interesting and relatively recent turn of events has occurred, see Intelligent Design vs. Evolution - The Miracle of Intelligent Design at the attached link.A Different PerspectiveThere is no widespread acceptance of intelligent design aka creationism within the mainstream scientific community. For an interesting and comprehensive discussion of the pseudoscience used to support ID and the scientific counter-arguments see the decision in Kitzmiller v Dover at the link provided below.
What actors and actresses appeared in Intelligent Design - 2008?
The cast of Intelligent Design - 2008 includes: Kyra Sullivan as Main
