Intelligent Design, Yes Or No?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SamIchi, Jan 6, 2006.

  1. SamIchi macrumors 68030

    SamIchi

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    #1
    I've always liked reading about the how ridiculous people get when discussing their religion and how science has proved nothing in their minds. I've read an article recently about how one person thinks, schools shouldn't be able to teach science cause it goes against religious beliefs. This was to rebuttal the issue that ID is not taught in schools. That's just plain stupid to me. There's a lot of things in religion that I think about and how ignorant these people are, because of it. They (not everybody that is religous) believe their religion is the ultimate dictations to their life. I could bring up more things, but I'll leave it at that.

    I'm sorry if this topic affends anyone, and if it does you don't have to join this duscussion, but I'd like to hear from both sides.
     
  2. Lacero macrumors 604

    Lacero

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #2
  3. SamIchi thread starter macrumors 68030

    SamIchi

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    #3
    Hmmm I see. Can someone move tihs for me?
     
  4. Qoxiivi macrumors regular

    Qoxiivi

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
  5. inlimbo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #5
    Well the main thing going against it (from my limited understanding as an economics/law student) is that ID is not like other scientific theories. If u have a theory it has to be testable in order to see that it is true. ID can't be tested. e.g. 'This tree was created by God' end of thoery. Ok prove it religious boy/girl! ID goes against everything that makes science science.

    The solution is simple. Im not religious but I went to a religious school. I was taught religion in Christian studies class and science in science class. Why do these bloody people have to make problems when their are none! If any one has read about where this ID stuff came from it would make ur hair stand on end.
     
  6. Kernow macrumors 65816

    Kernow

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Location:
    Kingston-Upon-Thames
    #6
    Definitely and absolutely no.

    I have no problem in people believing in this stuff if that's what they want. What really offends me is the attempt to teach this as science, which has a well established, experiment-based approach to establishing and testing its theories, which as far as I can see cannot be applied to ID
     
  7. caveman_uk Guest

    caveman_uk

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts, UK
    #7
    Intelligent design is theology not science.

    If you believe in God (I don't) then great, that's your choice, your belief. Going around trying to make sure everyone conforms to your beliefs (or is taught that they are as valid as a demonstrably better explanation) makes you no better than the taliban.
     
  8. gekko513 macrumors 603

    gekko513

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    #8
    No, it belongs in a philosophy or religion class, not a science class.
     
  9. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #9
    NO.

    ID has no scientific basis whatsoever. Total load of crap made up by people who can't get their minds around the wonders of evolution.

    Sure, teach it as a philosophy but keep it in the RE classes, it does not belong in science classes.
     
  10. cslewis macrumors 6502a

    cslewis

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location:
    40º27.8''N, 75º42.8''W
    #10
    Well, for the most part American schools don't have a religious studies/religion infulences class... I'm sure there would be an uproar if they even suggested including one in the curriculum.
     
  11. Qoxiivi macrumors regular

    Qoxiivi

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Location:
    London, UK
    #11
    I agree, certainly not in science - that's just plain offensive. I wouldn't even say it belongs in a philosophy class as it's too logicallly flawed and easy to debunk.

    The only way I think Intelligent Design should be studied (if at all) is as an anthropological artifact – in terms of its religious roots and social/political agenda.
     
  12. MongoTheGeek macrumors 68040

    MongoTheGeek

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    Its not so much where you are as when you are.
    #12
    Intelligent Design is one of the wacky things spawned by the law of unintended consequences.

    For every action on a complex system there are at least 3 results.
    1) in the intended direction of movement
    2) in opposition to the intended direction
    3) in some unforeseeable direction.

    In this instance the effects were.
    1) Teaching Creationism is banned.
    2) Intelligent Design in textbooks.
    3) venganza.org

    ID is a direct spin-off of the Scopes Trial
     
  13. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #13
    The proponents of Intelligent Design paradoxically contradict their own theory by their very existence.
     
  14. combatcolin macrumors 68020

    combatcolin

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Location:
    Northants, UK
    #14
    Darwin all the way for me.

    1stly because its been proven, but also because it honks off the Repulican Neo Con nutters that are trying to re-write the world.
     
  15. Palad1 macrumors 6502a

    Palad1

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK
    #15
    :D
     
  16. Kernow macrumors 65816

    Kernow

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Location:
    Kingston-Upon-Thames
    #16
    A truly magnificent website :D

    The Scientific American also published a document called '15 answers to creationist nonsense', which was a rational demolition of creationism (and various other flavours of it such as ID) and a good source of responses to the various objections that creationists raise against evolution.

    It used to be free, but it now seems like they are charging for it :mad:
     
  17. Jesus macrumors 6502

    #17
    As you may guess from my user name, I don't believe in religion at all, and to me nothing is sacred. ID was founded to teach creationism in school classrooms as science. What I find is sad is that in Kansas children are still being taught anti-evolution ideas, in science lessons, while what they are being taught has next to no scientific bases, and no outraged parents are starting a court case there. The Southern states in America are in my opinion the last place that science needs to reach out to. To seriously say that life is to complicated to form on its own, and to say that there has to be a divine spark/god, a monotheistic god, possibly a Jewish/Christian god, is obviously just designed to get around the US Constitution and teach religion in lessons. Man, I hate creationists.
     
  18. aquajet macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Location:
    VA
    #18
    Man, that's too bad. You could learn something from those you hate so much.
     
  19. freeny macrumors 68020

    freeny

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #19
    NO!

    Religion is a SCAM!!

    More people have been killed in the name of religion than all other killings combined times 10.
     
  20. aquajet macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Location:
    VA
    #20
    Clearly you've never witnessed the overwhelmingly positive influence religion can have over many people.

    Soviets? Nazis? Countless others who have murdered and happen to be of the secular persuasion? How about a link?
     
  21. inlimbo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #21
    I don't think we should attempt to see which is worse Religion v Nazism/Satalism using a body count. Both lose.

    Religion is good. Im not a Christian but i obey the 10 commandments without even thinking about it. All our laws come from the Bible etc... It is just that some people take it too far. This whole neo-conservative evangelist movement is a little bid scary. The parrallels with the Taliban are many. Even George W called his war on terrorism a 'crusade'.
     
  22. inlimbo macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #22
    Didn't the Supreme Court knock this whole ID thing on the head the other weak? Wasn't ID against the constition? Im not very familar with the court system in the US. Was it just a supreme court in one of the states? and therefore ID was only prohibited (so far) in one state?

    Any US residents can fill me in?
     
  23. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #23
    Depends a lot on how you set up your definitions. The Nazis were largely killing Jews (in terms of genocide and not military-related deaths), so it's easy to argue that religion is involved there. All US wars have involved invoking God to be "on our side."

    Of course, I think that's a fairly unrealistic argument. While the name of religion is usually invoked, the reasons for war usually have little to do with it. The US didn't invade Vietnam because we're Christians and they're largely Buddhists.
     
  24. floyde macrumors 6502a

    floyde

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Location:
    Monterrey, México
    #24
    How are Nazis secular? Furthermore, at which point did the soviets choose atheism as their main motivation for causing the harm they did?
     
  25. freeny macrumors 68020

    freeny

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #25
    How can you bring up the Nazi's? this certainly falls into my statement of killings in the name of religion. THEY WERE ALL JEWS!

    30 years war = 7.5 million died owing to Catholic-versus-Protestant slaughter.
    2nd Punic War= 300,000
    Revolt of 68-73 CE: 1,197,000 Jews killed
    Nazi's and WW2= 6,000,000 jews killed

    Really, I could go on and on and on and on. these statistics are just from the first 4 results from my google search. only 4,650,000 more to go:rolleyes:
     

Share This Page