Tuesday, August 02, 2005
The unknown truth of Intelligent Design
I was once an animate opposer to Intelligent Design (ID). That was until I found out through a few websites what ID really was. The media once again has lied to me. As you read this keep in mind that I am still on the side of Darwin, but have openly researched ID in light of recent events.
Let's clear the air right now and state something I was surprised to learn. The Christian Right Creationists, are ruining ID's reputation. In all arguments about ID, the Creationists are using only portions of ID to support their cause. Creationists know they will never be able to push creationism into the science class, but suddenly they see a group that does not agree with the evolution theory and uses science to back their views. So, they take the parts of ID they want, mainly the parts that say "Evolution Theory is wrong because..." and then they tag on a line never used by true Intelligent Design scientists-- "Therefore Genesis is right."
First lets establish for everyone what Evolution Theory entails, the facts and the theory. This is based on science and not bible, so what is printed here cannot be argued except maybe my over simplistic take of it.
1) We know that mutations occur in living organisms. Viruses show this a lot, but examples in more complex organisms has even been seen. While the changes to higher organisms were generally bad, a few good ones have been noted.
2) Survival of the fittest is an observable situation. Again, viruses display this a lot by growing resistant to antibiotics. Also, it's not too difficult to figure out that giraffes with longer necks get more food and increase their chance for survival over a shorter one and the trait is passed onto the offspring.
3) The fossil/dig record shows alike animals from different time periods. We see an animal common to a time period disappear and in the next time period see a very similiar animal, but showing different traits. Sometimes the spans of the two over lap.
Using these 3 statements, scientists developed Evolutionary Theory. In true science fashion they leapt from these facts to a likely explanation of what happened. While Creationists will balk at these statements (especially #3), true Intelligent Design proponets... DON'T. Intelligent Design's statement of purpose says they are based on science, and the 3 statements are scientifically sound. They part with Evolutionists only at the theory step. Instead their theory is that things are much too complex to be the result of randomness. They will commonly point out things that Evolution cannot account for which are good arguements. But, then the Creationists come around and bastardize that. I have even read recent ID writings that agreed some form of Evolution probably occurred, but that it definitely does not explain everything.
Because of the agenda being pushed by the Christian Right, ID has been tagged with falsehoods. Here are a few corrections:
*** ID says nothing about God, NOTHING. At the moment a lot of their work is figuring out scientifically how you can tell if something is designed intelligently or naturally formed. For example, a watch and a stone with pretty colors. Well, the rock's complicated colors are easily explained, but the watch's inner workings were obviously created by something intelligent. But how do you tell mathematically/scientifically? How is intelligence defined? These are questions they are working on. It might surprise Creationists to learn that ID scientists sometimes mention aliens from outer space. Not in a scientific sense, but when asked what is the source of this design if it wasn't human, they answer, "We don't know (or care). Whether it be some being, aliens, a universal computer, or something we can't even fathom, it's irrelevant to our study."
*** ID does NOT believe the Earth is only 6000 years old like pure Creationists. On an astronomy note, ID scientists generally agree with common beliefs about the creation of stars, solar systems, and even the Big Bang. Again, they are scientists and the proof that our planet is billions of years old is immense.
*** ID relies on the scientific method and never cracks a bible. Again, they are NOT starting from a preconceived notion of God or the book of Genesis. This leaves open the fact that someday their own proofs of design might actually proove them wrong. This happens over and over in science and if a fact is written on the wall, a scientist doesn't ignore it because of beliefs.
Yes, ID scientists will attack Evolution Theory. It's the job of scientists to question theories and push the burdon of proof if they don't buy into something. Evolution Theory does have some work to do yet and maybe in the future we will see some large strides. The foggiest area of Evolution that leaves the theory incomplete is the question of when do we have a new species? When does a species get to the point that it can no longer make viable offspring from a species sharing a common ancester? We're 97% close to a chimp's DNA, so why can't we interbreed (OK, stop the giggling!). The thought is that chimps and us share a distant relative. If so when along the way did we become unviable to each other? I have heard possible explanations, but again only theories.
I have seen a lot of bashing of ID on the internet and used to do a fair amount myself. While I have not been convinced that current Evolution Theory is not what happened, I have been convinced that true ID, unwarped by Creationists, actually has a place in the classroom, if only a side note when evolution is discussed. If backed with 100% science, I have no objection to any theory in a scientific environment.
Note: I tried my best to keep out Creation 'Science'. I could go on and on about how unscientifc that is and how it does NOT belong in a science class, but that's too easy a topic. :) As a word of caution, carefully examine anything you read on ID. A lot of stuff on the internet is warped because it was written by Creationists.
Let's clear the air right now and state something I was surprised to learn. The Christian Right Creationists, are ruining ID's reputation. In all arguments about ID, the Creationists are using only portions of ID to support their cause. Creationists know they will never be able to push creationism into the science class, but suddenly they see a group that does not agree with the evolution theory and uses science to back their views. So, they take the parts of ID they want, mainly the parts that say "Evolution Theory is wrong because..." and then they tag on a line never used by true Intelligent Design scientists-- "Therefore Genesis is right."
First lets establish for everyone what Evolution Theory entails, the facts and the theory. This is based on science and not bible, so what is printed here cannot be argued except maybe my over simplistic take of it.
1) We know that mutations occur in living organisms. Viruses show this a lot, but examples in more complex organisms has even been seen. While the changes to higher organisms were generally bad, a few good ones have been noted.
2) Survival of the fittest is an observable situation. Again, viruses display this a lot by growing resistant to antibiotics. Also, it's not too difficult to figure out that giraffes with longer necks get more food and increase their chance for survival over a shorter one and the trait is passed onto the offspring.
3) The fossil/dig record shows alike animals from different time periods. We see an animal common to a time period disappear and in the next time period see a very similiar animal, but showing different traits. Sometimes the spans of the two over lap.
Using these 3 statements, scientists developed Evolutionary Theory. In true science fashion they leapt from these facts to a likely explanation of what happened. While Creationists will balk at these statements (especially #3), true Intelligent Design proponets... DON'T. Intelligent Design's statement of purpose says they are based on science, and the 3 statements are scientifically sound. They part with Evolutionists only at the theory step. Instead their theory is that things are much too complex to be the result of randomness. They will commonly point out things that Evolution cannot account for which are good arguements. But, then the Creationists come around and bastardize that. I have even read recent ID writings that agreed some form of Evolution probably occurred, but that it definitely does not explain everything.
Because of the agenda being pushed by the Christian Right, ID has been tagged with falsehoods. Here are a few corrections:
*** ID says nothing about God, NOTHING. At the moment a lot of their work is figuring out scientifically how you can tell if something is designed intelligently or naturally formed. For example, a watch and a stone with pretty colors. Well, the rock's complicated colors are easily explained, but the watch's inner workings were obviously created by something intelligent. But how do you tell mathematically/scientifically? How is intelligence defined? These are questions they are working on. It might surprise Creationists to learn that ID scientists sometimes mention aliens from outer space. Not in a scientific sense, but when asked what is the source of this design if it wasn't human, they answer, "We don't know (or care). Whether it be some being, aliens, a universal computer, or something we can't even fathom, it's irrelevant to our study."
*** ID does NOT believe the Earth is only 6000 years old like pure Creationists. On an astronomy note, ID scientists generally agree with common beliefs about the creation of stars, solar systems, and even the Big Bang. Again, they are scientists and the proof that our planet is billions of years old is immense.
*** ID relies on the scientific method and never cracks a bible. Again, they are NOT starting from a preconceived notion of God or the book of Genesis. This leaves open the fact that someday their own proofs of design might actually proove them wrong. This happens over and over in science and if a fact is written on the wall, a scientist doesn't ignore it because of beliefs.
Yes, ID scientists will attack Evolution Theory. It's the job of scientists to question theories and push the burdon of proof if they don't buy into something. Evolution Theory does have some work to do yet and maybe in the future we will see some large strides. The foggiest area of Evolution that leaves the theory incomplete is the question of when do we have a new species? When does a species get to the point that it can no longer make viable offspring from a species sharing a common ancester? We're 97% close to a chimp's DNA, so why can't we interbreed (OK, stop the giggling!). The thought is that chimps and us share a distant relative. If so when along the way did we become unviable to each other? I have heard possible explanations, but again only theories.
I have seen a lot of bashing of ID on the internet and used to do a fair amount myself. While I have not been convinced that current Evolution Theory is not what happened, I have been convinced that true ID, unwarped by Creationists, actually has a place in the classroom, if only a side note when evolution is discussed. If backed with 100% science, I have no objection to any theory in a scientific environment.
Note: I tried my best to keep out Creation 'Science'. I could go on and on about how unscientifc that is and how it does NOT belong in a science class, but that's too easy a topic. :) As a word of caution, carefully examine anything you read on ID. A lot of stuff on the internet is warped because it was written by Creationists.
