Intelligent Design vs Darwinism
29 December 2005 Filed in:
Darwin NewsThe ruling by U.S. District Judge John E. Jones that the the Dover Area School Board in Pennsylvania cannot teach Intelligent Design as part of the Science curriculum strikes a blow for logic. That’s not to say that Darwinism and Creationism (or any other religious view) should not go head to head (as they are in Looking for Darwin): but there is a time and a place and the science curriculum is not one of them. The judge got it right when he concluded that so-called Intelligent Design is nothing more than religion dressed up as science.
The scientific methodology is not the only way that we can know about the world around us, but it serves no purpose at all to confuse what is science by including aspects that do not conform to its methodology. My world would be a pretty limited place if I only got to know it through the testable hypothesis, but equally science would be much the poorer if we compromised the hypothesis testing and rigour upon which it is based.Tags:Intelligent design, Judge John E. Jones, Pennsylvania, Science, Darwinism, Creationist, Creationism
