Actually, it's the otherway around. The more we try to prove evolutionism, the more ID makes sence. It takes more faith to believe we developed from a few gases and slime than to believe someone or something made all we see. That doesn't disprove that some things evolve, it just meants that something from nothing makes less sence.
Quote:
Originally posted by IROC
The problem with ID, though, is that it is not a scientific theory. There is no "scientific side" to ID. It predicts nothing. It explains nothing. It has no useful purpose other than to attempt to cast doubts on evolutionary theory (which it does not do).
The nail in the coffin of all of this rhetoric on teaching creationism or ID in classrooms would be to go ahead and permit it to be taught and then watch it fall apart as people actually tried to produce a textbook on "Creationism" of "ID". It can't be done. ID and Creationism are simply "beliefs" with no scientific evidence to back them up.
Mike
|