Judge rules against ID
Finally, a bit of SENSE from someone! This particular judge's description of 'Intelligent Design' is spot-on: "a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory". I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of creationism, and nor do I brush off Darwin's evolutionary theories (in other words, I'm undecided). However, I have been opposed to the concept of ID in classrooms since I first heard about it.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10545387/
Also, I highly recommend you read Barbra Streisand's latest online statement.
http://www.barbrastreisand.com/statements.html#bushlies
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10545387/
Also, I highly recommend you read Barbra Streisand's latest online statement.
http://www.barbrastreisand.com/statements.html#bushlies
posted by Anthony Stoddart @ 11:50 AM
1 Comments:
At Thu Dec 22, 01:11:00 PM,
Sarah said…
It should be taught in religious studies classes. When Bush said he supported 'different ideas' being taught alongside evolution, he didn't mean the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Ancient Egyptian creation myth. He meant christian ideas and christian ideas only.
That said, there is nothing wrong with discussing 'ID' or Creationism, but to pretend such ideas possess scientific standing equal to the theory of evolution is just ludicrous. Not for the science classroom.
Post a Comment
<< Home