I'm sorry there is ZERO science that supports the Bible.

1. What is "intelligent design," and is it science?


"Intelligent design theory" is built on the belief that evolution does not sufficiently explain the complexity that exists in life on Earth and that science should recognize the existence of an "intelligent designer." Proponents assert that their criticism of evolution is scientific, not religious. But the various aspects of intelligent design theory have not yet been subjected to the normal process of scientific experimentation and debate, nor have they been accepted by the scientific community. No research supporting the claims of intelligent design has ever been published in any recognized, professional, peer-reviewed scientific journal. Finally, the question of whether there is an intelligent designer is untestable using the methods of science, and therefore is not a scientific claim.



2. What is "creation science"? Is it a real science?

Proponents of "creation science" hold that special creationism -- the conviction that God created the universe, including humans and other living things, at one time in the relatively recent past -- can be supported using the methods and theory of science. Scientists from many fields have examined these ideas, however, and have found them to be scientifically insupportable. For example, evidence for a very young Earth is incompatible with many different methods of establishing the age of fossils and geological formations. Furthermore, because the basic proposals of creation science are not subject to test and falsification, these ideas do not meet the criteria for science.

3. Wouldn't it be fair to teach evolution and "creation science" and/or "intelligent design" in public schools?

The Federal courts have ruled that creation science is not science at all, but a religious concept. Therefore it is not appropriate content for a science classroom. More to the point, evolution studies, like other sciences, are founded on a growing body of observable, reproducible evidence in the natural world, whereas "creation science" is based on accounts written in the Bible and "intelligent design" is not yet supported by scientific evidence. Teaching evolution alongside these other approaches would imply that creation science and intelligent design theory are as rigorously tested as evolution, and they are not.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li...cat09.html#Q03

also a good resource:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/

http://www.talkorigins.org/

 

That's why they call it "faith." If you don't want to take a leap of faith, that's your decision.

As far as creationism/ evolution goes, other species do not destroy the earth.. only humans. Why would "evolution" produce such a cancer? If religion is so effective at controlling the masses, how do you reconcile it with the oppression in budhist coutries or the continuing hisorical conflict between muslims and christians?
If human rights, happiness, or existence can be proven to be better under a specific religion, would you promote it?

 

Why are those who do choose to have that faith find it so difficult to accept the decision of others not to? If those who believe in the gospel and those who don't would stop fighting to change the minds of the others, the world would be a much better place.

 

I totally accept others' such decisions if I think they were given sufficient information, as each person has free will.

Chrisnonstop seems to grasp the concepts or info I would want him to know (that eternal life is a reward for faith in Jesus). If he or anyone knows Jesus existed, knows Jesus had claimed to be the son of God, knows that Jesus foresaw his own death, knows that Jesus died on the cross, has even a casual understanding about the gospel and the teachings of Jesus (that got him killed), and knows how the earth shook and the skies darkened when he died, then he or anyone else is properly versed to decide.

Faith is not easy. It is actually hard.
No-one will know for sure what's right until we die, but we all will find out.

Don't mean to preach, but that's my take on it.

 

Helladumb, noone here was attacking faith. The question is regarding the devious plan of control-freak-religious-zealots to trick our educators into teaching religious myths as equalls to scientific theories. Regardless of anyones faith, that's just plain dumb. It's similar to them teaching the story of Hercules and the story of the fall of Rome in the same class and saying they both are equally likely to have happened. Stupid.

 

I don't disagree.. at least not at the moment . I think I've actually changed my mind, and think that Biology education should remain scientific. It is the job of parents to teach religion, not the schools (unless it's a religious school, of course).

 

Schools teach a lot of things they shouldn't and don't teach a lot of things they should. The theory of evolution should be taught, however more time should be spent exploring the holes in the theory, otherwise how are we to advance the science?

 

Damn it. I voted "no" (shakes fist)
Well, since biology is a science, I guess I have to agree with you

 

I don't see the two sides as mutually exclusive neither.

 

Nearly every great physicist has proclaimed that his work led him to a greater faith in the existence of God. The issue is that the pursuit of understanding of the physical universe frequently leads to contradictions with the Bible, Talmud, and Koran. This cannot be allowed by the churches based on the gospel.