Evolution Vs. Intelligent Design

Intelligent design and Evolution are both controversial issues about how we got here to earth. Intelligent design suggests that certain features of the universe can be explained by an intelligent cause. Evolution suggests that the way every living creature is today was a cause of natural selection. The people who thought of intelligent design seek to have their Idea thought of as a scientific theory even though it deals with things of the supernatural world. Evolution however was developed by Charles Darwin and is currently thought of as a scientific theory because of the way he went about creating the theory of evolution by using the scientific method. Darwin actually researched his work through the study of different types of finches. He believed that new species branched off from other similar species through the process of natural selection or the survival of the fittest. Both of these theories are controversial, and neither is allowed to be taught in certain public school systems. However, in college students have the choice to choose weather or not to take this type of class. The three theories of creation, intelligent design, and evolution are controversial and Interesting in their explanations for why we are here.
Intelligent design is basically like creationism. Both theories say that there is a higher cause or more intelligent being that created everything. However, intelligent design does not like to be associated with creationism. With intelligent design they do not directly state who is the intelligent being. But with creationism they suggest that it was a “God” who created everything. These two theories can go hand in hand with each other but should not due to the creators of each theory. They like to think they are different, but I believe that they are the same. Both of these theories have a basic explanation for how the universe was created its either A) God did it, or B) an Intelligent Cause did it.
Evolution however is unlike these theories in that it states that neither God nor an Intelligent Cause created the universe. Evolution doesn’t even suggest how the universe got here; it just suggests how the creatures came about to be how they are today. It doesn’t even state how the first creature came to be on earth. It simply states that through the process of natural selection species mate with the stronger mates among them. Also, it states that the weak among the species will eventually die out to create a better stronger breed of that species.
There are many problems with this theory and the others. This theory doesn’t explain why monkeys are still around if humans came from that species. It also doesn’t explain why humans haven’t changed among the years. Although we don’t look like most of our ancestors, the human being is much the same. It doesn’t give a reason for why there isn’t a master species of birds or any other creature.
With Intelligent design and creationism they both don’t give reasons for how exactly we were put on to the earth or why certain species change on their own (ex. the finch). They are too broad of an explanation for anything. They don’t give reasons or detailed explanations for why some species aren’t around anymore either. Both theories are faulty, yet many people follow them anyways.
Christians and many other religions believe in creationism and many scientists believe in evolution. The same person can accept these ideas; they are not total opposites at all. There are Christians who believe in natural selection but still believe in a God. There are also scientists who believe in God as well as evolution.

Both theories try to explain how humans came to be on earth. As you can see neither theories are proved or disproved right or wrong. They both have followers and both have faults in their ideas of why we are here. I believe that neither theory should be taught alone, and that the same person can believe them both.

Protestors of the Creationism Museum

Just as you believe God whole heartedly and that he created everything with no evidence then you should believe in the Noodly Master, because like God he created without evidence. It isn't that I don't believe in God, I just don't believe in discounting someone else's beliefs just because they conflict with my own. Evolution provides evidence to creation and how it was done. It doesn't say that God does not exist and that he did not create. It is just a theory with some evidence on creation. Accepting this does not make me an atheist. I could accept these views by accepting the fact that God used different things to create. God made animals before man, although he created man from his likeness, he could have also done the same with monkeys or he could have decided to create man and influence their look with the image of monkeys. While yes that is farfetched and I don't believe it, I am also not disputing evidence by saying it isn't possible at all. If you can believe in God without evidence, then someone else can believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster without evidence. God is not science and neither is the Spaghetti Monster.

How to tell if it is science.

This flow chart is a parody, depicting how to determine if a piece of information is science or religion. Instead of evidence being scientific, it is seen as “religious dogma”; while religious facts are seen as science. This is the complete opposite of what is currently taught in schools and is common knowledge for the public. The creator of this chart is probably trying to persuade the viewer that religious statements that lack evidence should be considered scientific and that should not be disputed. In fact, religious statements could never be scientific, because evidence does not exist to support it. Yes, the bible exists, but it was created by man and has been changed by man. It is hard to fully believe it without other pieces of evidence. This chart is funny believes it shocks the viewer and makes them think about it for a moment, before deciding whether or not it is ridiculous or true.

Creationism in Comedy

Creationism Museum Debate

The creationism vs. evolution debate continues on in the form of a museum. Ken Ham spent several millions of dollars building a museum that showcases the biblical portrayal of how the world was created. It appears that this is his way of accepting evolution and showcasing his beliefs on evolution. This museum was advertised as being a museum and a laboratory for scientific investigation of the theories showcased. Ham’s museum has led to a large debate on whether or not this was a good move. Many people find the museum to be ridiculous and a mockery of biblical beliefs. The museum may be opening but it isn’t certain how long it will stay open. The views expressed in this museum are the biblical beliefs of how the world was created and came to be. It explains the dinosaurs and the arrival of man. The public does not have a problem with the beliefs shown in the museum, their problem is with the way those beliefs are displayed.

Too Much for One Period

The idea of teaching Intelligent Design is good in theory, but it is just not possible. First schools would have to teach evolution and explain it to students. To teach evolution they would have to get them to disregard all they have ever known about the existence of the world. After this, teachers would finally be able to teach Intelligent Design, which would reinforce what they have just made students forget. All of this would take up more than one class period. Students would be thoroughly confused, so extra time would need to be taken to further explain the ideals of both theories. Furthermore, teaching Intelligent Design would be teaching tolerance. Intelligent Design disputes creationism, but it also provides tolerance for other beliefs as to the existence of people. If this tolerance is allowed, then why aren’t other theories allowed to be taught? "So much for today's biology lesson" could stand for the fact that the lesson took so long and confused the students, thus getting nothing accomplished for the day. The subject is then changed to geography, but the globe is not round. The flat globe shows that now that Intelligent Design is being taught, tolerance for other ideas like a flat earth must also be taught in the classroom. The flat earth idea seems to be ridiculous, but if the "odd" idea of Intelligent Design must be taught then other "odd" ideas must also be taught. It appears that the cartoonist also feels that the Intelligent Design idea is ridiculous. This is shown by the fact that he draws the teacher switching from the topic of Intelligent Design to Intelligent Geography ("the earth is flat" theory).

Taken from: http://www.goalsforamericans.org/gallery/d/245-4/IntelligentDesignCartoonSteveSack8-8-05.jpg