• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Evolution Vs. Intelligent Design: The Debate Continues

Posted on: Saturday, 26 February 2005, 00:00 CST

Coming to terms with science

Reading James Lileks column, Can intelligent design complement evolution? (op-ed, Feb. 18), I was amazed by the intellectual sleight-of-hand by which he was able to suggest that science and religion ought to be taught at the same time.

I presume the science teacher is meant to announce a time-out when the topic of evolution is reached and tell the class that he is now going to switch to a study of comparative religion: Native American views of creation, Christian views, Buddhist views, etc.

I doubt very much that is what Mr. Lileks had in mind: I suspect his goal was to suggest that the notion of intelligent design actually belongs in the science class as another theory to be discussed with an open mind.

On Saturday, in a letter to the editor, Daniel Talbot takes Lileks argument further. He suggests that because state-controlled education is secular, Christians and the state are in conflict.

On the issue of intelligent design, however, there is no need to claim that there is a conflict between the secular state and Christians. Remember the Enlightenment!

Prior to the Enlightenment it was generally considered that God had a hand in every action not a sparrow fell from the tree nor a blade of grass grew without his intervention. However, Enlightenment thinkers discovered natural causes for most phenomena and actions. This was science or natural philosophy, as they termed it.

Most Christians have come to terms with science. But if one considers science to be a form of religion since it excludes a supernatural entity in its explanations, then I doubt if there can ever be a middle ground for further open-minded inquiry, as Lileks would have us believe.

Malcolm Macpherson-Smith

Virginia Beach

Where are missing links?

I found Professor Donald Swifts comments (letter, Feb. 16) regarding the inappropriateness of intelligent design in a science course as most unusual. As a man of science, I am confident he has looked into this issue at length before coming down so decisively on the side of evolution as the only truly scientific explanation for the origins of life.

I am also a college professor, at Chowan College, and a member of a Virginia Beach church. One thing I have learned in my studies is that simply because I may not fully understand a theory is no reason for me to reject it totally.

I question Swifts assertion that Darwins theory of evolution is testable. Although we have been able to demonstrate change within a species, through selective breeding and other ways, the fossil record is woefully lacking in any actual proof of transformation between species.

Why, after so many decades, thousands of researchers and millions of dollars spent on archaeological digs, are scientists still unable to produce an abundance of fossils of transition species, the so- called missing links?

Those who support intelligent design do not propose cutting out all debate about evolution. Rather, why not present the strengths and weaknesses of both theories side by side in our schools and universities?

To say an idea moves from hypothesis to theory based on scant evidence of suspect validity does credit to neither the science nor the scientist.

Bud Livers

Virginia Beach

Give students a choice

Scientist Donald Swift says that in his 41 years as a scientist, he has never met another scientist who gave any serious credence to intelligent design. Is it possible that birds of a feather flock together?

Albert Einstein made the comment, I would be disappointed in God if there were no God.

In Lee Strobels books The Case for Faith and The Case for a Creator, he interviews many of todays top scientists, who all have concluded that the razors edge elements necessary for life clearly point to an intelligent designer.

To state, as Mr. Swift does, that intelligent design has no place in a science course shows his left liberal bent. Reasonable scientists, who look objectively at their studies, admit that anything that has a beginning has a beginner.

Our students should have the benefit of both the flawed theory of evolution, and the case where science leads, intelligent design, taught in science courses as well as in studies of spirituality and religion.

Robert M. Parsons

Edenton, N.C.

Source: Virginian - Pilot

More News in this Category