Science, just Science News

The news items in here are created by the SJS team. Any comments left in here are the sole responsibility of those making the comment and may not reflect the views of the SJS campaign or it's contributors.


March 02, 2006

No Difference Between ID and Creationism

Science, Just Science - News

ID proponents are fond of saying that they are "not creationists". This article, which I picked up at Panda's Thumb, makes some interesting comparisons.

ARE THERE ANY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTELLIGENT DESIGN AND CREATIONISM?

By Jason Rosenhouse

The Court’s decision in the recently completed trial Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board contains the following revealing passage:

A “hypothetical reasonable observer,” adult or child, who is “aware of the history and context of the community and forum” is also presumed to know that ID is a form of creationism. The evidence at trial demonstrates that ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism.

With these two, blunt sentences, the Court managed to pierce an illusion crafted by the leading proponents of Intelligent Design (ID).

The illusion was that ID and creationism were fundamentally different things. Scientific creationism (SC), they claim, is inextricably linked to the creation story in Genesis. ID, by contrast, is a solid scientific theory resting upon a firm foundation of biological fact. And while theological inferences could certainly be drawn from it, such inferences are unrelated to the theory itself.

ID’s finest minds presented this argument to the Court, and the Court, confronted with unambiguous evidence to the contrary, laughed in their faces. There has been no end to the teeth-gnashing and hand-wringing in the ID community ever since. In light of this, let us determine once and for all whether it is the Court, or the ID proponents, who have it right.

Read more at;

http://www.csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/differences.html

, , , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger Joshua said...

Too bad this makes no sense. Ken Miller believes in the God of the Bible who created the world. He accepts common descent. He just sees no evidence of design ANYWHERE.

Michael Behe believes in the God of the Bible who created the world. He accepts common descent, he merely sees evidence of design in some biological features.

There's very little difference.

Behe is a theistic evolutionist. End of story. Miller has claimed God worked thru quantum mechanics to get the desired outcome- which one could easily argue is a form of theistic evolution. That would put Miller and Behe almost in the same boat.

No difference between ID and creationism? Give me a break. Find ONE creationist who believes in common descent. Good luck...

2:37 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home