alansmithee

Its funny you should say that, because in the article you quote, they state the basis of (one) ID theory

Now, if that isn't ID, I don't know what is. You misinterpreted the title of the article, as well as misinterpreted ID. Evolution and ID are NOT incompatible. ID just gives a reason for the initial spark (which evolution doesn't, and for which there is no empirical evidence). It doesn't give a progression from point A (first appearance of life) to point B (where we are now) and beyond, which is what evolution does. And in this case, the Vatican has supported ID and evolution.

Where the secularists get so lathered up is in confusing the two. Are there people who would teach that the world is only approx. 6000 years old, and that there were never dinosaurs? Yes, there are. And I would agree that wouldn't be scientific. But that has nothing to do with ID. To assume it does is foolish, and a purposeful misinterpretation just to fuel a anti-Christian agenda.


I would even go farther than that. You can teach evolutionary theory-it is something being tested, and that (generally) stands up to scientific proofs. But evolution doesn't explain how life initially started, which is what ID is about. And when evolution supporters do try to use it to show the origins of life, they are being no more scientific than those who support ID. Because neither have empirical evidence or can be tested (at this time).

Personally, I think they both should be left out. Talk about Darwin and the evolution of life, but leave out mentioning anything about the origins of life. And if people want to know, a teacher can direct them to literature that discusses the issue, or just say that there is no sure answer. That would skirt the whole issue. But I'm sure neither side of the debate would listen to something like that.