Letters and Comments

Reader Comment of the Day

By U.S. News Staff

February 3, 2009 RSS Feed Print

Popular polls aside, Intelligent Design has every bit as much scientific credibility as Evolution.

Tom Williams of OH in response to John Farrell:
Creationism and Intelligent Design Should Be Kept Out of the Classroom

Reader Comments Read all comments (3)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

The History of the conflict of science and religion is a fact of life.....and dogmatic theologians are not going to give up their creeds or beliefs for anybody....because they cannot or will not understand the science of Life which is larger than all of us....evolution has been with us since the beginning of time and will be with us till the end....like Infinity..... we are all evolving.....and each individual determines his own speed...Cordially....

Steve S. Roisman of CA 5:10PM February 04, 2009

Teaching intelligent design in school prepares students for the world in what way? It shows the slippery way some folks use to try to slither around the law that prevents the teaching of religion in public schools. It does not accurately convey any sense of what science is or how scientists work or how scientists view the world. Take a GRE exam or walk into a cancer lab and see how far one's knowledge of intelligent design will take you. Intelligent design is another way to lie to children in a way so transparent, the proponents of it should be ashamed.

Peter of TX 2:10PM February 04, 2009

To be scientific, a theory must:

1) Propose an explanation for a given observation.

2) Make predictions for future observations.

3) The predictions the theory makes must be falsifiable (ie. the prediction can be expected to fail if the theory is incorrect).

Both Intelligent Design and Evolution pass the first test.

For the second test, Evolution makes predictions on how a species may change over many generations. Those predictions have borne themselves out time and time again, both in the laboratory and in the observable wild. ID on the other hand, makes no predictions at all, it is simply a statement of faith that all species are the way they are because someone decided they should be. It tells you nothing at all about how a species may change over time.

For the last test, Evolution passes the test as it would be clearly evident in the laboratory and in the wild if it was incorrect. For example, the overprescription of antibiotics would have likely wiped out all bacterial infections if Evolution was wrong. ID once again fails the test, because it is specifically formulated to be unfalsifiable (eg. you can't see God because he doesn't want you to see him, or because you're just not trying hard enough).

This doesn't make ID wrong, simply unscientific. It therefore does not belong in a science classroom. If you want to discuss ID in school, feel free to create an elective class on Theology.

Andrew of CO 8:01PM February 03, 2009

Letters and Comments

Welcome to the U.S. News Readers' Letters and Comments blog. Positive or negative, reader feedback provides added perspective to any story. New letters and comments will be posted here several times a week. Thank you for your submission.

advertisement

Cartoons

advertisement