Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Amnesiac42
so i'm surious to know, (and i'm not being a smart ass, i really want to know) what evidence is there for evolution?
|
The principles of evolution are even found in children born with what we call deformities. One need only go back through fossils to see the progression of life as species 'deformed' to become other species. In that chain are the so called 'missing links'. But even DNA analysis demonstrates massive identical strains between man and other 'so called' lower level mammals.
To have a theory, first one must demonstrate the theory is consistent with other known facts and theories. To take that theory to fact is what we are all taught even in junior high school science. There must be a consistent theory AND (second) there must be experimental evidence. As additional evidence continues to demonstrate the concept of evolution, the concept becomes a more complete fact. Remember, much evidence of evolution (like most science) has only been discovered in the last hundred years. But already there is much evidence that supports the theory.
Meanwhile Intelligence Design is only speculation. Intelligence Design does not even have sufficient information to be called a theory. Does it have any supporting evidence? No. None. Is it consistent with other existing science facts and theories? No. In fact the concept of Intelligent Design often contradicts well established science principles. But then show me. Show me where Intelligent Design meets the criteria as taught in junior high school science? It does not. It does not even meet the criteria to be a theory.
Intelligent Design (ID) is similar to a Rush Limbaugh decree. Somehow we just know it must exist because someone all powerful told us to believe it. We need not know why nor have any supporting evidence. Somehow that is sufficient to call it a science. ID does not even meet the criteria necessary to be a theory.
ID is based upon an interpretation of an early science book called the bible. Mankind has since used what was learned from the bible and other good books - then moved on. Mankind disposed of parables that were clearly erroneous.
But you tell me. If Adam and Eve had Cain and Able, then how did Cain and Able have children? Spontaneous reproduction? Inbreeding? As even Father Jerome Murphy-O'Connor notes, "The Gospel should be read spiritually, but with critical intelligence." "What the church insists on is the spiritual message of the Bible, not its literal truth."
What worked from the bible, then mankind carried forward to develop new ways of thinking, proving, learning, and therefore advancing mankind. The bible was an early attempt at establishing order. To base ID on a strict biblical interpretation when the bible has so many errors, well, that again makes ID only speculation.
Therein lies a fundamental difference between science and religion. Science has long since move forward - established better criteria - defined a difference between a fact, theory, hypothesis, and speculation. Science says we have so many more of god's laws to learn. But the teachings behind Intelligent Design says we already know all god's laws. How myopic - as well as bad science.
The concepts of evolution pioneered by Darwin are regularly demonstrated in fossils, DNA, biochemistry, and other scientific principles. ID is based only upon spiritual speculation which is sometimes in direct contradiction to science. After all, biblical interpretation also insisted that the earth was flat and that the sun went around the earth. This too was proven from scriptures - and then recanted when scientific principles prove those speculations as false. That's right - speculations.
If ID had any scientific basis, then spontaneous reproduction is also a valid theory. Spontaneous reproduction has as much basis in fact as Intelligent Design. Neither meets the criteria as even taught in junior high school science.
But look. If your religion believes Intelligent Design, then good. Do as my religion did. We went to religion class after school to learn about religious beliefs. Concepts based upon religious speculations have no place in science, math and public school. Those parts of the bible that were accurate are already taught in and as science and math. I resent speculations being taught as science when Intelligent Design clearly violates principles upon which science and math are based. The word is 'clearly'. But then show me. Using principals of science as taught in junior high school, show me how ID meets that criteria. It should be easy given that ID has been taught for well over 2000 years. Show me.