User login
Navigation
Syndicate
Popular content
All time:
- Do Atheists believe in ghosts or spirits?
- How was the earth created?
- You think we came from monkeys?
- What do you do in a crisis if you don't believe in God?
- Where do atheists get their morals from ?
- Best Evidence For and Against A Young Earth?
- Holiday Shopping via Amazon
- Prove there are no gods.
- Would the apostles have died for a lie?
- Secular response to a sneeze.
- What is an atheist ?
- what about NDE's?
- Did Jesus really exist?
- a question of logic
- The Great Big Arguments #3: Cosmological
- How do you explain creation?
- An Atheist's Faith
- Josephus on Jesus
- How does science explain the human conscience?
- About Ask the Atheist
- Adaptation VS Evolution
- Was it Common for Hellenistic Jews to Write Fiction?
- Christ a Fake
- Social Contract?
- How to handle biblethumpers at the door.
Consequences of ID taught over Evolution
Firstly, "teaching the controversy" or "critical analysis of evolution" is literally teaching Intelligent Design.
There is no fully developed theory, as Philip E. Johnson has admitted:
"I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational world."
ID really only consists of a series of arguments against evolution, the default conclusion of which is a designer. Teaching the controversy allows all of these arguments to be aired. Only the designer's identity is left out, but it's pretty darn obvious.
The world won't fall apart if a generation of people, and even scientists, dismiss or never learn evolution. Even in cases like flu vaccine updates, doctors would keep doing what they're doing because it works. They'd just come up with different reasons why it does, as in, "God works it like this." Nothing supports a theory like evidence which the theory itself was changed to match.
The true consequence is that we would lose our insight. We can apply proven techniques and technologies and rationalise however we want, but if we don't understand the true reasons why they work then we can't refine them or make any new ones except by trial and error. We stagnate.
As Ken Miller has suggested, a country which sacrifices scientific understanding to maintain its beliefs falls behind the rest of the world. He's terrified that this will happen to America. I worry too, but I do think some hard data showing the country's slipping technological superiority would spur some patriots to give science a shot in the arm. I hope it isn't needed of course. Anyway, I'm Australian.
Comments
I'm Australian too, from
I'm Australian too, from Newcastle NSW :) Where are you at?
Of course I realise that ID is mainly over in America. However if it does gain a foothold in America you can be sure it'll start scratching at the doors to the rest of the world. They've tried in some areas of Europe, for example.
We're not as insanely religious here in Oz (I hope? Am I wrong) so there's less chance of it being pushed into our schools, but the worry is still there. And it'll be a lot easier for ID proponents to say "see, Australia? Your ally America teaches Intelligent Design! You should too!"
Even living in Australia that's why I'm worried about the situation in America. Hopefully that makes sense.
Thanks for the response. I was vainly hoping for a whole list of doom and gloom predictions to go with my questions to some theists about what benefit ID brings to humanity as a whole, but of course you're right. People ignoring evolution will probably just say "God did it" and use facts discovered in light of evolution to continue their work, without being able to make new insights.
It's YOUR Hell, YOU burn in it.
http://healyhatman.blogspot.com/
Brisbane.
Brisbane here.
Another thing I probably
Another thing I probably should have asked about... If they manage to push through a religious view of the origin of species, why would they stop there?
Who's to say the next "Teach the Controversy" battle won't be over say, trying to get science/geology teachers to teach "both sides of the debate" ? Namely Earth as 4.6 (?) billion years old versus "Intelligent Rock Design"
Fairly far fetched, but one would have thought so is Intelligent Design as a science.
It's YOUR Hell, YOU burn in it.
http://healyhatman.blogspot.com/
Not farfetched.
Evolution is a target because it contradicts the Bible. Geology and cosmology do the same thing, and hey presto, they're already targets. Look up "Flood Geology" and "White Hole Cosmology".
On a totally unrelated note
On a totally unrelated note I have an adaptation of "The Emperor's New Clothes" that I wrote up on my blog at
http://healyhatman.blogspot.com/2008/02/idiots-new-clothes.html
Called "The IDiots New Clothes"
Not a particularly GOOD adaptation - probably filled with all kinds of errors and whatnot... But I'm still proud of it ^^
Also I did look up flood geology I just haven't come across anyone yet screaming "Teach The Controversy!" about it.
Doesn't matter anyway they all start the scientific process backwards - take their unchangeable answer and pick and choose the evidence they think either supports their theory or better yet clashes with a real one.
It's YOUR Hell, YOU burn in it.
http://healyhatman.blogspot.com/