uselesslegs
Noob
Karma: +390/-1
 Offline
Posts: 1601
 Badges: (View All)  
|
 |
« on: March 14, 2011, 03:06:57 pm » |
|
The problem I have with intelligent design, is that it suggests a posit, based on nothing...and by nothing, I mean no work that provides data to support it. If it is going to enter the school system, it needs to be able to revolve around facts learned from the works done that lead to the scientific observation of it's hypothesis and theories.
Any work done to date, verifies nothing that is postulated or suggested. My other problem is that it is not ultimately neutral. It implies, not so subtly, that all the biological mechanisms intelligently put in place lead irrevocably towards one conclusion, that God did it. Not a God, but the God of Christianity, without any evidence or markers that are decipherable as Christian in nature, let alone any lab work at all that points towards any intelligent design.
To me, that is religion trying to be science, but not wanting to hold themselves to the standards that they cite for qualification of serious inquiry.
I have nothing against ID, nor would I reject it if it could in fact show very strong lab research that displayed divine origins, implementation and construction. But it does not and has not.
I'm all for shaking up the world, readjusting my reality with new information, but it's unfair to children (in a secular school system) to favor one religion over another, using science as a shield of legitimacy for verification.
|
