Intelligent Design / Creationism

[Tamrin]

Judgment Day
Intelligent Design on Trial

[Excerpt - Nova - Linked Above]

Watch the Program

This two-hour program is divided into 12 chapters. Choose any chapter below and select QuickTime or Windows Media Player to begin viewing the video. If you experience difficulty viewing, it may be due to high demand. We regret this and suggest you try back at another time.

[Tamrin]

[Tamrin]

[Tamrin]

Intelligent design

[Excerpt - Article, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - Linked Above]

Intelligent design is the proposition that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." It is a form of creationism and a contemporary adaptation of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, but one which deliberately avoids specifying the nature or identity of the designer. Its leading proponents—all of whom are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank—believe the designer to be the God of Christianity.

Intelligent design was developed by a group of American creationists who revised their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of creationism as science. Proponents argue that intelligent design is a scientific theory. In so doing, they seek to fundamentally redefine science to include supernatural explanations. The overwhelming consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is not science, and indeed is pseudoscience.

[Tamrin]

Why Is Creationism a Paranormal Belief? Is it paranormal to believe in the Bible? [excerpts]
Published on March 8, 2012 by Erich Goode, Ph.D. in The Paranormal

The creation-evolution debate was once the most contentious and deeply-rooted controversy on the American landscape. The evolutionists have won most of the victories in this war, but we can still hear a muted creationist battle-cry in the background, from fundamentalists, in local churches, in small-town newspapers, in polls and surveys, among school board members, in the courts. The debate hasn't exactly disappeared, and the two sides haven't exactly called a truce, but it's no longer an all-out, pitched war, nor does it usually become front-page news. It's possible, however, that the conflict could erupt under trip-wire circumstances.

Scientists regard creationism to be contrary to natural or scientific law. Nearly all of them believe that creationism violates one or more natural principles they accept as impregnable; they argue that the creationist account of the origin of the universe virtually cannot be true. Hence, in their eyes, the literal facticity of the Genesis account is an example of a paranormal belief. The cause-and-effect mechanisms that Genesis says makes material processes work-for which science can offer a vastly more plausible account-are paranormal in nature. Creationism and science differ radically with respect to the age of the universe and the earth, the mechanisms by which they came into existence, the emergence of distinct species and when they appeared-simultaneously versus in determinable sequences-and the Genesis account of the Noachian flood. Scientists argue that the biblical account explaining the mechanisms of these phenomena or events took place is magical, mystical, occult, scientifically falsified, and contrary to the workings of the natural world-and hence, paranormal.

Virtually no fundamentalist Christian regards creationism as a paranormal belief; most feel the term is pejorative, implying that their article of faith is "kooky," "weird," "far-out," "spooky," "strange," "bizarre," tainted, stigmatized, or discredited by-and hence, would emphatically reject the term.

While the chasm between the scientific community and the general public on the creation-evolution issue is enormous, that between scientists and conservative Christians is even greater. Not quite twenty years ago, a biologist and I talked about the strength of creationist beliefs. He predicted, as a result of the strengthening of the scientific curriculum, that these beliefs would meet their demise within a generation. As a sociologist, I reminded him that such beliefs were tenacious and not perfectly in synch with scientific knowledge. I'm sure my friend would have been disappointed by the results of the latest Gallup Poll.