Reformist Muslim

Exploring possibilities for the future of Islam and other thoughts

Location: London, United Kingdom

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

Why Intelligent Design Is Not Science

Yesterday's historic judgment by Judge John E. Jones III in the case of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, clearly and coherently describes why Intelligent Design can not be taught in science classes.

Judge Jones goes through very thoroughly what science is, how intelligent design is not science, how ID in making its arguments twists the theory of evolution and why even if intelligent design was correct in pointing out gaps in the theory of evolution (which it isn't), it would still provide no positive evidence for the intelligent design hypothesis.

For those unconvinced, pages 64-89 of the judgment which deals only with the science is necessary reading. For those interested in the plaintiffs and the background to the case, this is found from pages 3-7. The rest is American constitutional law dealing with things such as the Establishment Clause and the Lemon tests.

To conclude, I'll quote part of Judge Jones' brilliant conclusion.

'their (id advocates) presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeated in this trial, Plaintiff's scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator.

To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or misrepresent well-established scientific propositions.'


Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Hit Counter