I noticed that a Humanist in another thread made a statement that led me to believe that he did not equate "intelligent design" with religion. This is a subject that probably should get more serious & widespread discussion than it does. What do you think?

Wondergirl

Just for fun -- how could ID or Creationism be presented in a public school science class so no one becomes offended or confused?

Fr_Chuck

I doubt you can present anything that has to do with the starting of our universe without offending someone.

evolution : upsets those who follow ID or creation
ID : upsets those who follow evolution or creation
creation: upsets everyone who follows ID and evolution, plus then you
have the issue of whose creation do you use ( what religion)

I am not sure in public school you can do any one method without offending someone, So perhaps all should be touched on at least in ideas that are accepted by others.

Capuchin

It would need scientific evidence, and, for good measure, at least a hundred peer reviewed papers on the subject in well-established scientific journals. This means it should be able to make predictions, which we can then design an experiment to verify that prediction.

At the moment, ID presents none of these things, which is why it is not suitable for the science class. Because it is not science.
It doesn't upset "us" at all, chuck, it just has no place in a science classroom, because it is religion.

Capuchin

Good thing that evolution has nothing to do with the starting of our universe, then.

jillianleab

I understand your objection, Gal, but you didn't answer my questions. What does teaching "creator did it" get us? Unless we define a specific creator, it means nothing. Would you creationists stop complaining if, on the first day of school the science teacher said, "We're going to study science in this class, but you should know, it is possible, though not proven, that it could all have been done by an intelligent creator. Now, moving on, let's talk about photosynthesis..."

Wondergirl

It doesn't have anything to do with the STARTING of our universe.

Capuchin

Well, the first 9 billion years.

Wondergirl

Nope. What STARTED the process of evolution? (and yes, it is a process, not the start of anything)

Where did that first spark of life come from?

Capuchin

Life could not get far in space, there are many hypotheses about this, and the vast majority of them require a terrestrial setting, whether it be due to a lightning bolt, ocean foam, clay, radioactivity, sulphates etc. Since the Earth only formed 4.5 billion years ago, evolution is irrelevant for the first 9 billion years unless we find some evidence for an extraterrestrial form of life, at least from evolution on Earth's point of view.

Wondergirl

During the past billions of years, when has a "lightning bolt, ocean foam, clay, radioactivity, sulphates etc." or other agent spontaneously created life a second time?