Intelligent Design Debate Begins (What Exactly is Science So Scared Of?)
The statement read to Dover students states in part, "Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered." Miller said the words are "tremendously damaging," falsely undermining the scientific status of evolution.
"There is no controversy within science over the core proposition of evolutionary theory," he added. On the other hand, Miller said, "intelligent design is not a testable theory in any sense and as such it is not accepted by the scientific community."
Why is there such a fear of religion? Why do these people feel so threatened by anything that may present an idea that cannot be explained away? They say the “Bible beaters” are the ones scared to test their beliefs against science, yet in this instance, science seems to be scared to death of having to compete with faith.
Mr. Miller argues that the statement the school requires is “tremendously damaging” and falsely undermining the scientific status of evolution.
But it’s not! That statement does not make a single claim that is not fundamentally true. Darwin’s theory is just that… a theory. There are inexplicable gaps in it’s core premise. The “Intelligent Design” theory is nothing more than saying those “gaps” are filled with the idea that an intelligence, greater than our own, gave the process the helping hand it needed.
Why is the scientific community so afraid of anything that may allude to a higher power? The religious groups are not trying to remove evolution from school, just provide an idea, a possibility, a “theory” of an alternative.
Bottom line for me is that I don’t understand what the “Scientific Community” is so scared of. They claim intelligent design cannot be proven… but neither can Darwin. They would have us believe we should take their text and studies, a mere generation old, on the “faith” that they have done enough research to prove its validity.
But at the same time, I’m supposed to dismiss text, research, eye witness accounts, and “case studies” that are THREE MILLENNIA old? I think that is asking people to make a stretch, not the other way around.