Monday, June 6, 2011

Intelligent design is not a vaild scientific theory and it should not be treated as one.

It is, at best, nothing more than a philosophical viewpoint supported by cunningly constructed straw-man arguments.

Science demands quantifiable data and repeatable results.

Pointing out the gaps left by a pre-established theory and defaulting to hastily deduced conclusions do not validify a theory as scientific.


  1. Agreed. The people who espouse intelligent design are just trying to cloak creationism in more modern and palatable terms.

  2. Indeed. I am somehow fundamentally more okay with people pushing their religious beliefs on people loudly and at face value than I am with people trying to sneak their agendas into a field of study by exploiting the votes and funding of a public that largely doesn't understand the core issue.

    It's not about keeping religion out of schools. It's about keeping unfounded, unfalsifiable philosophy out of the science classroom.

    Perhaps it's the engineer in me, but the ID "teach the controversy" push in America right now really bothers me. It's one thing to indoctrinate your children and berate others for their non-belief. Fine, whatever. Those are, unfortunately, personal liberties. But to disguise religious doctrine as science and knowingly take advantage of the technical ignorance of the general public is completely despicable, and I feel like there is a good case for public policy against it.