Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Science and Technology » Intelligent Design Opinions

Intelligent Design Opinions

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

While Bush has come out in support of teaching intellgent design, and Comedy Central spent a week on the topic, here are three other perspectives on the issue:

  1. This is a theory that is getting much positive coverage. OK, admittedly the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster may sound weird in name but give it a chance. Read about it. And be sure to read the responsesfrom the Kansas school board members.
  2. Bill Frist says he’s for the teaching of this theory. (Thanks to Josh Marshall for the link.)
  3. Here’s a good blog and petition on the topic.

Ed/Pub:LM

Powered by

About Scott Butki

Scott Butki was a newspaper reporter for more than 10 years before making a career change into education... then into special education. He has been doing special education work for about five years He lives in Austin. He reads at least 50 books a year and has about 15 author interviews each year and, yes, unlike tv hosts he actually reads each one. He is an in-house media critic, a recovering Tetris addict and a proud uncle. He has written articles on practically all topics from zoos to apples and almost everything in between.
  • Baronius

    That’s a good petition?! Have these people ever read anything about ID? Talk about “straw men”!

  • Scott Butki

    Point me to a better one please.

  • Luke

    The guys who’re trying to stop ID are all wankers, I want ID to be taught just to piss them off.

  • gonzo marx

    argh!

    ID IS NOT A THEORY BY DEFINITION!!!

    it’s not even a decent hypothesis

    it IS an excellent topic for a discussion in metaphysics, but it is NOT scinece by definition

    nuff said?

    Excelsior!

  • http://victorplenty.blogspot.com Victor Plenty

    Arr! Be at peace, all ye beloved children of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

    Remember all the definitions, from hypothesis to theory to unprovable assertion, were created by, and meticulously arranged for our eventual enlightenment by, His Noodly Appendage.

  • Gayle Lileo

    Last time I checked there isn’t recourse to breaking a theory, a law on the other hand…

  • http://victorplenty.blogspot.com Victor Plenty

    Break the law of evolution, and your genes die out. The law of gravity can be broken with penalties far less severe than that.

  • http://www.scoopstories.typepad.com Scott Butki

    Thanks for the responses.
    Have you seen the Onion’s take on intelligent design? I’ll have to post that later.

  • Les Slater

    Intelligent design? It’s a retreat from trying put forward creationism, the literal interpretation of the bible.

    Many people do, at least to some extent, believe in some aspects of the biblical stories. However, very few people would consider the biblical creation counter to scientific evidence. Their beliefs are a personal matter and not seen as in the realm of science.

    The creationists made an error in believing they could pass off the bible as a scientific document. This was popularly defeated. ID is a step backward, a retreat.

    I think people are a lot smarter than they are generally given credit for. This will fail, and evolution, and science in general, will come out more firmly established.

  • http://www.scoopstories.typepad.com Scott Butki

    I hope you are right.
    I pray that you are right, pun intended.

    Ok, let me go find that Onion piece I promised…

  • http://www.scoopstories.typepad.com Scott Butki

    Here we go:

    http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512
    Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New ‘Intelligent Falling’ Theory
    August 17, 2005 | Issue 41•33

  • Bennett

    Scott – clickable links dude, please!

  • http://www.scoopstories.typepad.com Scott Butki

    Sorry, I’m new and am still learning.
    Let me try that again.

    The piece is here.

  • http://jmaximus.blogspot.com John Bil

    I created the universe 40 years ago children. All those who claim to have come before me were created by Pat Robertson in advance to trick you into believing in the devil. I shall offer you my children a new commandment:

    “Bring forth 40 women with large breasts and ample booty. These women shall then sacrifice their buttocks for prompt anal for 40 nights.”

    “This I will call good and righteous. I the lord shall smite all those who bringith women of ugliness and flat smelly buttocks.”

    This shall be posted throughout the land for all to see.

  • Les Slater

    “I hope you are right.
    I pray that you are right…”

    Don’t just hope and prey, think about it.

    The people behind this intelligent design crap are buffoons. They know not what they are doing.

    They think they are attacking evolution. But only a grinning shyster would run with this simpleton explanation of how our surroundings and we came about.

    What are they really doing? Well, first this is a bold attack on the belief that the Lord created the world according to His Word. The IDer’s position consciously drops the idea that the world was created 8000 years ago. It accepts the observed archeological data. It just puts forward the concept that this history could not happen by the evolution of natural selection of changes from accidental mutations. They claim the only plausible answer is that there must have been an intelligent guiding force. They don’t claim any bearded dude or burning bushes.

    How is organized religion to deal with this? If they accept it, then they are admitting that God’s word is not true, that we must have a more sophisticated, not literal, view of the bible. The bible all of the sudden gets put in the same category as the Easter bunny, Santa Clause and other such children’s stories.

    Of course there will be those that insist that the bible is the Word of God and we risk fire and brimstone if we believe otherwise. To the extent that ID gains a hearing, these people will become isolated.

    And then what? Ritualistic superstition becomes less attractive. We no longer have the comfortable images of our Creator but a remote and impersonal ‘intelligence’. How is one to argue that He (we no longer even have the concept of Him anymore), no, it, whatever, is on our side in whatever controversy we are trying to force down somebody’s throat?

    We will have to resort to reason and observable facts.

    Praise the Lord!

  • http://www.scoopstories.typepad.com Scott Butki

    The Intelligent design trial has begun.
    Anyone watching coverage of it?