« Explore La Raza, too | Main | Insulted Republicans »

September 29, 2007

It’s not science

I feel compelled to respond to Donna Gillett’s letter to the editor (9/24) regarding the “Kansas vs. Darwin” documentary.

First and foremost, the vast majority of the scientific community stands behind the theory of evolution.

Although the theory of evolution can be examined and challenged using scientific methodology, intelligent design cannot.

Since intelligent design cannot be investigated using universally recognized scientific standards, like empirical and/or measurable evidence-gathering techniques, it cannot be validated and thus should not included in any serious scientific discussion or science class curriculum.

David Pumphrey
Overland Park

Comments

THAT was my foot

Philosophy is a walk on the slippery rocks...
Religion is a light in the fog...

JUNGLEJACK

Jack - to echo Zeno - I don't want ID in schools either (except in a debate forum, which could be informative and educational) but I see nothing wrong with teaching evolution along with the contradicting scientific evidence - as well as the unquestioned claims by evolution that have no scientific evidence behind them.

If the other side would at least quit throwing their opinions around as if they're facts it would go a long way toward a compromise. A simple phrase like "...most scientists agree that..." in lieu of an absolute statement would make a big difference.

Engineer

'Although the theory of evolution can be examined and challenged using scientific methodology" But that is not true. No experiment has ever been designed so that if it succeeded it proved or disproved the theory. What has been established is that different life forms have existed at different times. We do have a historical record, but there is no real explanation as to how one species evolved into another, or of how life started, or of how single cell entities evolved into multi-celled ones, or of how invertebrates evolved into vertebrates, etc. In short, there is nothing about the historical record that I can see that validates either 'random selection' or "intelligent design". The record shows that change happened but, IMO, that is all it shows.

zenozac

Of course, for centuries we didn't understand what caused most diseases and under "intelligent design" we shouldn't have bothered to look. But, hey. It is a small price to pay to get creationism in the classroom. Isn't it?
Posted by: jack | Sep 29, 2007 11:06:02 PM
Jack can't you just be against something. Why are you so often making up scenarios that YOU think fit others reasoning? First nothing about teaching ID-creationism excludes scientific research. But you constantly say that to make anyone on the other side look stupid. But the reality is you look stupid for making some farfetched statements.

I personally do not advocate teaching ID in schools. That is for church and each individual home to decide. I would like evolution to be taught as a theory. One to date that has no evidence to suggest it is a certain fact. But that is not how it is taught. It is taught as hard cold fact and if you dare to question it you are ridiculed mightily in school. Go to some of the evo websites and look at the ridicule heaped on unbelievers.
The truth is we have religion being taight in schools and it is called evolution. And they will burn you at the stake if you dare to question their faith.

Chris40

"Don't you understand? According to "intelligent design" the very fact that we don't understand PROVES that God...er, I mean... the "intelligent designer" did it."


Are you sure you are stating Intelligent Design Theory correctly here, jack?

jack

Oh boy! There you go insisting that religious beliefs hidden as scientific fact should have to stand up to the same tests that regular science does. Man, are you about to be attacked.

Don't you understand? According to "intelligent design" the very fact that we don't understand PROVES that God...er, I mean... the "intelligent designer" did it.

Of course, for centuries we didn't understand what caused most diseases and under "intelligent design" we shouldn't have bothered to look. But, hey. It is a small price to pay to get creationism in the classroom. Isn't it?

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright