Expelled: Is Intelligent Design a Science?

I believe in freedom of speach. So much so that this kind of thing bites me in the ass so to speak. On piciple alone all popular theroies have there place in public education. One will have to hope that people are "Intelligently Designed" enough to understand and figure out the "truth."



Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.

- Albert Einstein



Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it.

- Andre Gide

Oh, and just in case anyone is wondering what my point of view is personally I do not believe in metaphysics of any kind. This includes, but not limited to, God, Love, ESP, and the like.

Why is this? Don't you think a school should be a place of learning, not a place to equate completely unsubstantiated and unverifiable ideas with those supported by mountains of evidence just because a lot of people believe it? Sure, you can say "gee whiz a lot of people think the moon is made of cheese" (hypothetically) but it doesn't mean it should be presented as an alternative to being made of rock.

Oh and I have read the bible too.

"As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand."

- John (ch. VIII, v. 44)

(sorry for dp, but I can't edit)



Yeah, those white male Christians, so discriminated against in modern American society.

The point is that truth and facts are not the same. I can in fact provide a mountain of evidence that indeed could say that the mood is made of cheese. The truth of the matter however is completely irrelevant.

My point is this if people want to believe the moon is made of cheese and study this in school they should be able to. Why? Because you can not be above reproach in ideals if you start limiting which ideals everyone else should have too.

Science is derived from the process of verifiable experimentation, the formulation of hypotheses, and with conclusions drawn, as best we can from replicable data. That's why we have a "Theory" of Evolution, and a "Theory of Gravity." Only so much data is known.

Intelligent Design is derived from the Bible and Christian Fundamentalist Doctrine.

Science has a place in schools; religion does not.

I don't know this movie. But by going with what you said about it, notably

it am inclined to view it as the usual ID propaganda.
For one, criticizing "evolution" (I assume that means "evolution by natural selection) - while not necessarily a bad thing to do - doesn't make ID any more or less of a science. So even if the standard theory about evolution is wrong, I don't see what that has to do with ID being taught in science classes. The other thing is that I don't see how connection to Nazism or Global Warming would disprove evolution as a scientific theory. If at all one could argue that science itself leads to negative moral or social trends.

There is a rather large Wikipedia article about this movie which pretty much tears it to pieces. Of course Wikipedia articles may be biased themselves, but this one quotes its sources rather well, so I am inclined to believe it.
Also the "Expelled Chronicle" on the movie website seems more concerned about atheists and the pope than science, so get this tiny suspicion that this movie (as the rest of ID) has more a religious agenda then a scientific one.

But if that movie can indeed show that ID deserves to be treated as a natural science, I am interested to hear about its arguments for it. But as long as there won't be really big news, I stick to my opinion that ID is no scientific theory and should thus not be taught in science classes.
If people want to teach it in religion or ethics classes, I am fine with it.

Intelligent design SHOULD be taught and the paranormal SHOULD also be taught. There are as many issues with the theory of evolution as there are with the theory of intelligent design. To be frank, we really don't have a clue if either is correct because science is NOT absolute (explained next paragraph). Science only has explored a tiny fraction of Earth and space using limited tools of our design (most of Earth remains unexplored, from the rain forests to the deepest depths of the ocean). Furthermore, the paranormal is something science commonly ignores. There is sufficient data out there to explain that paranormal events (such as ghosts, aliens, and alternate dimensions) exist. However, scientific theories attempting to explain these have either not been drafted, ignored, or set aside.

Science is not an absolute, as I said earlier. Science has been wrong many times because it only explains and catalogs what we observe and what we think we can understand. It does not handle things we cannot understand and often jumps to artificial conclusions based on what we think we know. Science has contributed greatly to holding back knowledge and persecuting people. There was a time where science said the Earth was flat. There was a time where science had a number of incorrect theories about the solar system including placing Earth at the center of the universe. And we live in a time where science's laws of physics and thermodynamics have been broken for years by German and Australian inventors with perpetual magnetic drives (you can actually test this out yourself and there are videos on youtube explaining how to violate the laws of physics and thermodynamics).

Science is important, yes, but we need to stop clinging to theories and laws especially when they've been called into serious question by religion, inventors, explorers, and other people who have legitimate claims. Science also tends to have a phobia of things that could be mythological or fantasy, and that includes everything from documented sea serpents and dinosaurs living in our world today to the origins of our species and planet and even to faster-than-light travel.

NO


To define science you have to have

1. a theory
2. proofs
3. rational arguments

Intelligent design is this

1. A theory, magical beings created us all from a seriously flawed design spec that has left us open to all sorts of critical system failures and disease.

2. Proof is well, umm, cause we cant believe that we evolved and the bible says so and my mom says always believe the bible cause it answers everything

3. Dont need no rational argument outside of god did it and thats that.


Evolution states

A theory that we evolved through billions of minor evolutionary changes over billions of years

the proof is in the fossil record, dna understanding and the visible and proven changes that have occurred within various recorded species such as moths going from dark to light to match smog conditions. thousands of individual proofs joined together to form a fairly cohesive theory

rational argument backed by facts and changeable to suit new understandings, findings and scientific discoveries.

that is the difference between myth and science. Science never says the boogeyman did it.

Before I start my diatribe, I would like to declare that I am a God believing Christian and that I'm abhorred at some people blur the line between Intelligent Design and the belief in God. First of all, the theory of evolution will never precede the philosophical need for an explanation of life. Like the pope saidWWW Link, "They are presented as alternatives that exclude each other,” the pope said. “This clash is an absurdity because on one hand there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such."

Anyways, getting back to the argument:


Science itself will never be defined as something that is logical but not true. Science is based on mounds of experimental evidence and experimental confirmation. Just because something seems logical does not mean it's true. That being said, why should we train and learn something that isn't true? Sounds ludicrous.



The previous assertions are simply false. The connection between the theory of evolution and Nazism is itself far fetched and weak. Nazism is a culmination of Facism, Militarism, and Nationalism playing on people's traditional ideals of romanticism and mysticism. If anything, nationalism -the idea of a pure blooded German people- had more to do with Nazism than the theory of evolution. Also, how does evolution contribute to global warming? If anything, global warming will trigger evolution of species, not the other way around.

Even if these prior assertions were true, should we stop teaching something simply because certain people interpreting knowledge one way can be a detriment to humanity? Should we stop teaching physics because it contributes to people developing bombs and guns?



Here is where the movie tries to blur the lines. Intelligent design itself is based off of no actual testable hypotheses or scientific facts. Thus, it is not scientific. Intelligent design fails to be supported by scientists because it fails basic scientific principles and thus fails to be published in journals, not because it has religious support. Some of the greatest scientific minds are religious and have immense amounts of support, for instance Francis Collins (director of the public Human Genome Project).



I guarantee that whichever primary schools decide to do this will jeopardize the opportunity of their students to get into any half decent college. Likewise, any university doing this would likely lose their credibility in the world.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiNGK3y5Ypg

This video debunks many of the points that Ben Stein attempts to make in Expelled. I urge you all to view it regardless of your original viewpoints on intelligent design.
WWW Link

---

---

Actually, this was never believed by science. This was included in some children's book somebody during that time wrote. Also, science has become more rigorous since the onset of the scientific method...

The only interesting thing about “Expelled” is how P. Z. Myers was refused entry to its premier, even though he appeared in the film. What kind of idiot “expels” a vocal opponent of intelligent design, from a screening about how we shouldn’t expel people who believe different things?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZFG5PKw504&eurl
Disproves evolution. End of story, lock the thread.

Actually the story of Columbus proving the world was round etc. was made up by Washington Irving (same guy who wrote Sleepy Hollow). He felt that the US needed some founding myths (similar to England's King Arthur) and so he made up a bunch of stuff, like Columbus, much of what we think of as he Thanksgiving story, and other things. He presented them all as true and factual and the real stories have been forgotten by the public.

Then how do you explain bacteria that has strangely become immune to some forms of antibiotics? Bacteria is evolving and becoming harder to eradicate.

Just like how certain disease's that we thought we had killed off many years ago have suddenly evolved and become deadler: So yes, Evolution DOES exist.

I always find arguments for "Intelligent Design" laughable, because they place artificial limits on what is "possible" in the natural world with just chemistry, physics, and natural events left to do what they do over billions of years. Over a universe that's at least many billions of light years across, potentially infinite (we'll never know, due to the limited speed of light), how can one say that life is too complex to arise through natural events?

There's no evidence for intelligent design, it's just a creation story similiar to what all primitive cultures have. It's based on ignorance, and a fear of having no preplanned purpose.

If we were intelligently designed, the designer sure did a bad job.

Are we a gigantic Sims game for universe spanning aliens? Hillarious. We've no point, no purpose, not reason. We merely exist. Our morals, our fables, and our beliefs are based on systems that result in more of us -evolution. The system that works best (including cultural systems) results in more units using that system. Then that system breaks apart and new permutations arise.

Intelligent Design is like picking lint from your belly button. It's nothing new, and it's not based on reason or courageous thought. It's worthless, and it's not science by any stretch of the word, it's a transparent attempt to get religion into schools. It's political not scientific. It's despicable in my opinion.

ZJBDragon,

While it's true that science doesn't know everything, that doesn't mean that it (and we) doesn't know anything. The real power of science isn't that it can tell us what is true. It's that it can tell us things that aren't true. Things like geocentricism, creationism and the luminiferous ether have all been ruled out by lack of evidence. It's like a paleontologist slowly excavating a fossil. He scrapes and chips away the stone, and all that we are left with is the fossil. By extension, in science we can determine which things are a part of reality (the fossil) and which are definitely not (the surrounding stone) through evidence.

And that's the main crux: evidence. You say that ID should be taught; please provide some evidence that it exists. You say that "paranormal" should be taught; please provide evidence that it exists. You say that we can violate the laws of thermodynamics; please provide examples. Don't say that we can just find it in some video. Link to the video. If you want me to believe that you know the secret to overthrowing the work of millions of scientists working over the past two hundred years to build up all modern science (not just evolution) then please provide some evidence. If you can't, then why should I believe a thing you say?

I'm a white male Christian. I'm not persecuted. I'm certainly not discriminated against. I have my life as lucky as you do, and as most people on this forum. I have opportunities that billions of people don't, and I'm perfectly aware of this. People like you, on the other hand, seem to think that we are not aware of this, and promptly make fun of us for it. You also make fun of us for other reasons. I'm not lamenting it, I'm living with it.
My point is, you're being totally unnecessary.

And for the record, I am an evolutionist, in that I believe that evolution was the method by which man developed - I just believe evolution was a tool of God (and believe that Genesis 1 is quite symbolic, like Revelation is symbolic). This is one example of why I don't think science and Christianity (for one) are at odds.

Remember that science is for creating models of the universe that function until better models come along. Is Intelligent Design, scientifically (and only scientifically), as good as or better than evolution? I don't think so.

The question is, is ID a purely scientific theory, or not? If it is not scientific, it shouldn't be taught as such. Once it gains enough support from objective, verifiable evidence (i.e. conforms to the nature of scientific method) to compete with evolution as a theory, then sure, go ahead and teach it.

Remember, science concerns the "how" of the universe, religion concerns the "why".

This is not necessarily true. Though it has its roots in the Bible, Intelligent Design is more then that. Plus they aren't saying that they are teaching it as a religious study, but as a logical one. Quite a few school districts have already defined scientific learning as a study of logical explanations for occurances, therefore this theory a long with any other logical theory will now be taught upon request in those school districts.



Actually people are utilizaing this as a tactic. There are a few organizations that are starting to request that their theories, no matter how ridiculous(though logical) have to be taught now, or else they will take action.



Well it does make some arguements for ID. The movie is mostly satire then anything else. The main point it brings to light is that the theory is generally discredited because it has religious ties, which the movie claims to be discrimination and the silencing of a dissenting voice.



On the contrary, much of the Earth rainforest has been explored thanks to the marvels of computer technology, flying, and statelites, the oceans do somewhat remain a mistery but dozens of expeditions to the depths happen every year.

As for the paranormal and the proof of such activity through the gathering of data. I Would say that data can be manipulated to say many things and draw many different connections. I could relate the number of pirates to average global temperature. Just because the fact that the number of pirates has dropped and average global temperature has risen does not mean one caused the other.



1. They do have a theory, and it is logical as it follows a 'if/then' hypothesis.
2. They do have proofs, tons of written data and documentation, believed and respected by millions.
3. Well that is a rational arguement, but it matters on your point of view.



The fossil record has gaps that range from thousands to millions of years. Plus the theory of evolution does not in any way state a process for how life originated in the process. Anyone can therefore say that God began this process and evolution followed the path he chose for it.



Because that is not how science works. We only have assumptions, we only have logical arguement, we only have the data we collected. Sure some of it may be accepted, just like the theory of evolution, but that by no means makes it true. Nothing in science is an absolute.



I am not necessarily argueing for one side or the other. I just wanted to present a premise for the movie. It was sort of an example of the tactics used to discredit evolution and make ID seem more acceptable by comparison.



Well the movie states that just because it has roots in religion does not mean it can also not be scientific. It brings to light a sort of discrimination against scientific theories that have drawn influence from a religious doctarine. Not to mention that there is proof for ID, not necessarily scientifically documented, but documented none the less. And although it might be strange to follow something that might be a fallacy the data that supports ID has drawn huge support from educators and the general public.



I doubt that, they are teaching ID as an alternative to evolution. They are teaching both, and with hope equally.



Laughable as they may be, many more people in that a higher power was involved in creation rather then that life just began through conventional means. I mean the current calculated odds for life place our existance at such odds that to many the chance explanation is not enough. It stands to reason that that might be true, for as of now we have no better alternate, scientific explanation then "it happened, and thats that."

How many people discussing this thread as if you were knowledgeable have actually done serious study on the subject of evolutionary biology? And I don't mean armchair pop-culture tidbits that you've gleaned from CNN and the internet. I mean like actual, real learning, like taken courses in the subject, read some textbooks, that sort of thing.

And amongst those of you that may have some actual room to talk about 'verifiable evidence,' how many of you have been involved in any kind of real scientific study? Like, have you been there, playing about with the test tubes and petri dishes and taking notes? Beyond whether or not you understand to any degree the incredible complexity of cellular biochemistry, have you seen it at work in a controlled environment?

In the end, most of the information on this subject is, by necessity, absorbed from some third-party source that we consider to be credible. That right there blurs the line between 'fact,' and simple information that is commonly agreed upon.

There are millions of man hours that have been put into studying this debate, at a very real and very scientific level. And many of those people on the cutting edge are still divided, a consensus is nowhere close to being reached. Don't marginalize the efforts of an entire scientific field by pretending that you, some random voice on the internets, have discovered irrefutable proof from some videos that you've seen on youtube, or some sermon (sorry, seminar) given by Richard Dawkins.

Intelligent design has logical roots in religion. Sort of. This is true in that astronomical navigation has roots in religion. And in fact, all of human thought and philosophy has come out of religion. This is because, whether you subscribe to a faith or not, you must admit that religion is the first attempt (successful or unsuccessful as it may be) by human beings to determine the underlying truths of the universe.

Mock it as primitive all you want, but the reality is that priests were pushing forward human knowledge long before the tenants of science snuck their way into a human mind, more or less became commonly accepted by the world at large as the sole arbiter of truth. And they've been right about many things, at least to the extent that sir Isaac Newton was right about that whole classical physics thing. So is it so bizarre to think that maybe they could still be right about something now, even if it may not be in precisely the way they thought?

Intelligent Design is not creationism. It is not even necessarily a school of thought that demands the presence of a god. It is simply the suggestion that at some point during the evolutionary process, there is some awareness that guides the development of species. This could be some sort of self-awareness, on a cellular, molecular, or any number of levels. This might seem far-fetched to you, but there is some evidence for it. I mean, hell, how well do we even understand the concept of 'intelligence,' let alone the full implications of a process like natural selection? It is not impossible, or stupid to think that the elegance of nature may have come about by design.

If one studies the history of human design, you can observe a startling number of parallels between the way commonly used artifacts of everyday life and technology have developed, and the way living organisms have developed throughout or fossil record. Read 'The Evolution of Everyday Useful Things,' by Henry Petroski. This book has nothing whatsoever to do with evolutionary biology, but it does provide a very interesting look at the process of technological advancement, and it is very simple to look at cases where a combination of guiding intelligence and lessons learned from failed designs and see some startling similarities.

Should it be taught in schools? Hell. Maybe not. Should evolution? Like, honestly. Can a high school freshman even begin to try to comprehend a subject that complex? I think that we should offer the evidence, and let the academics debate about the underlying principle. In the end we will most certainly not resolve the debate to either sides satisfaction in the next few years. I think the only thing we can say for sure is that it is completely wrong to bully people into picking one road or the other as if it is the only logical option. Especially children.

For the record, I'm not an evolutionary biologist, so I don't really know one way or the other. But the rhetoric being put out by rabid atheists reminds me a great deal of some radical religious factions. It sounds like fascist horse-crap. Stop and check yourself before you spout off, lest ye become what ye despise, or something.

That's just as valid as saying "It's not impossible or stupid to think that the elegance of nature may have come about by giant exploding turtles." tbh. Molecules don't have intelligence, atoms don't have intelligence, the only intelligence that is assumed for is one that's a God.



Teaching that people believe in ID is fine. People believe in all sorts of silly things. But they don't belong in a science classroom, they belong in a comparative religions classroom.



There are always going to be "gaps". Species don't magically disambiguate themselves, where at one point there's homo erectus and then homo sapiens just pops out of nowhere. It's like alien scientists 2000 years floating down in their ship, digging up some fossils, and saying "well, you know, there's this guy, and what appears to be his grandmother, but the in-between isn't there..so never mind".

could not agree with you more! This is why I support the removal of evolution from our schools. evolution most certianly is an unsubstantiated and unverifiable idea, and just because so many poeple have come to support it, it is in the schools.

Oh, Americans...

I wish you people would stop worshiping the evil death god of the Bible.