Psuedo-science v. Science v. Religion v. Facts v. the Bible: Intelligent Design v. Theory of Evolution

I've been reading some interesting articles on the debate of "intelligent design" v. Darwin's theory of evolution. Court battles are pending. School boards are being forced to waste resources on a topic that keeps changing its name. The ethics, honesty and intellegence of the teaching and scientific community are once again being challenge by religious fundamentalists.

What you should pay attention to in this debate is how it is protrayed in the media. The current issue of Columbia Journalism Review has an excellent article detailing how this debate is being handled in the media -- nationally and locally. The article, Undoing Darwin, does a through job of discussing the "debate" and provides citations of sources to explore for more detail.

The August 22, 2005 issue of the New Republic has an article, The Case Against Intelligent Design, that pulls no punches on what is behind this debate.

Some scientific and education-related associations with useful discussion and points of view include:

National Center for Science Education
Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
The Textbook League

The The Pew Forum has some interesting research relating to this and other education topics.

Of course, if you find youself at a hot tub party with your friends at www.ontheborderline.net, you might want to read up on what The American Thinker has to say about the debate. This is a source of information sited regularly by the OTBL'ers and it has an article titled Why intelligent design theory ought to be taught.

On this topic, I've often thought that where we came from isn't as important as where we are going. Personally, I more concerned with my life on Earth than what comes after. This is an issue where ignorance plays a giant role in confusing the facts of science with the stories of the Bible. The "flat Earth society" is alive and well and trying to get its foot (feet) in our public school house doors. If you want to teach a class in comparative religions in public school, I'll vote for that. If you want to hook-winked the uninformed masses into replaying the Scopes' Monkey trail over and over again, I'm against that.

Where do you stand on the issue?


Roadkill said...


I certainly agree that the so-called "intelligent design" theory is so much bunk and should be kept well clear of the public school classroom.

My only issue with your post is the idea that ID or other religious theory is trying to "get its foot in the schoolhouse door." The fact is, School prayer was an institution in public education for over 100 years, up until 1962 when the US Supreme Court all of a sudden discovered and determined that it was unconsitutional.

My point is that the ID'ers, or other advocates of religious instruction are not trying to break into a heretofore citadel of secularism; rather, they are trying to reclaim old territory.

Anonymous said...


I have to agree with you here.Before Madalyn Murrey O'Hare non-denominational school prayer was as American as apple pie.

You can read more about her here: