If intelligent design is true, the design is called evolution.

I’ve had a few interesting comments on my Scott Adams bit from micadelic and I thought I’d bring the discussion to the main stage here…

Evolution is a scientific fact, no question. I’m with you there. My religious friends even agree. What I hear from them is that they believe that humans are not 100% directly a result of evolution. They say; “where’s the missing link?” Why aren’t there species that are somewhere in-between humans and animals? Humans are so much more intelligent than animals, so much more capable of manipulating their environment, contemplating the infinite, understanding the mechanisms of life itself, shit, creating life for that matter. What they say is evolution absolutely explains 99.9% of nature but there is something different about a human that is the result of a divine intervention. We were made in the image of our creator. The rest of creation is there for us, the animals of the land and the sea, etc., etc. I would also have to say that while they accept evolution, they believe that it was evolution that was designed, implemented and shepherded by a higher power.

It’s a valid thought, and discussion is warranted, but not in science class. That is an opinion. There is a leap of faith there. It is not a scientific theory.

If I were religious, I would reconcile it like this:

Science studies natural explanations. As such, science cannot “prove” my belief in divine intervention. Therefore science will uncover or discover the natural explanations and I, myself, in my own spiritual quest, will uncover or discover the influence of the divine. I will not expect science to prove or disprove that which it cannot study. Indeed, part of the answers of the biggest questions in life cannot be answered by science. Hence philosophy, art, culture, religion, etc. Science just addresses the science-y parts.

So, if humans are, as some believe, a result of some degree of divine intervention, or if there is even a possibility that this may be the case, should it not be mentioned in a science class instead of simply stating “Humans are a result of Darwinian evolution, that’s it, no argument, end of class, better get it right on the test.” In other words, forget what your parents and your priests have taught you Johnny, they’re wrong, you evolved from a monkey.

Science class should teach the generally accepted theory. It should also mention competing scientific theories. Intelligent design isn’t a scientific theory. This is not an opinion. There is a rigorous scientific community that studies the subject in question and there are no comparable competing theories, certainly not ID. Science class is the wrong place to contemplate supernatural explanations. Mom and Dad can still teach their kids what they think is right.

Now, I’m not saying I’m with the IDs here, just saying that it’s an interesting debate and I’d like to hear your take on it.

I appreciate your thoughtful comments and I like *any* debate, but this shouldn’t be a debate. Have you ever heard of, for example, a mathematical theorem on late 19th century British literature? Mathematics does not address matters of literature. Biology and physics do not address matters concerning all-powerful dieties. This is as it should be. If intelligent design is true, the design is called evolution.

If intelligent design is true, the design is called evolution.

One thought on “If intelligent design is true, the design is called evolution.

  1. micadelic says:

    Awesome! Now excuse me while I inject a little possible crackpottery in here but it relates to the ID or no ID debate and I’m interested to get the opinion of lolife, the resident astronomer…

    Coincidentally (or maybe by design :)) I was listening to Coast to Coast AM last night and I heard a couple of authors who wrote a book called “Who built the moon?.”

    Their theory is that future humans traveled back in time to build a moon and insure that the Earth would orbit in exactly the right alignment to the sun to safeguard the evolution of humans. (I can’t get past the question of if they had to go back in time to make everything just right for human evolution, how is it that they evolved themselves to go back in time to do it?)

    Now, that sounds crazy but these guys are convinced the moon was in fact constructed and is a part of intelligent design. They say there are 3 different theories of intelligent design; the above mentioned “future humans” or time travel theory, the ET or ancient astronaut theory, and the old trusty God theory. They in fact, don’t discount any of the 3 theories, they just believe the time travel option is the most likely. Go figure.

    From what I could make out while drifting in and out of sleep, they suggest that the size, orbit and relationships of the moon, sun, and earth are based on a specific measurement scale (can’t remember what it’s called but it’s based on a ‘yard’ of 87 centimeters or something like that) and that it is too perfect to be arranged this exact way by accident. They also said that it was designed in such a way that it would be so obvious to humans of our current vintage that it is there by design that we would be forced to question it and therefore uncover our true origins! In other words, it’s scientifically provable.

    Now, correct me if I’m wrong but just because something is perfect, does that mean it was designed? With so many billions of galaxies, wouldn’t there be just about every possible configuration of planet to moon to sun? Did Earth just win the life lottery? Dose life exist because someone designed a perfect environment for it or was a perfect environment inevitably and accidentally created just by the law of averages which, in turn, inevitably produced life? Are we a natural by-product of our environment or was the environment designed to support us?

    Kind of like since there are billions of grains of sand on the beach, does it make sense that one of the grains would be a perfect cube or a perfect sphere? Or would the only way to get a perfect cube or a perfect sphere be to have an intelligent being construct it?

    Now when I read this I feel I may be overstating the obvious (which I’m wont to do sometimes). So sorry if it’s just mundane and not provocative.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s