The Origin of the Species
Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial was the title of a recent episode of PBS’ popular documentary-style science show Nova. The topic centered around a Federal Court case in Pennsylvania which was veritable show-down between Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and the more recently popular notion of Intelligent Design. The judge was basically asked to determine whether or not Intelligent Design should, in fact, be considered a credible scientific alternative to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.
Put very simply, Intelligent Design basically states that life is too complex to have evolved over time, and thus must have been designed by an “intelligent agent,” while Evolution states that life evolved over time based on the process of natural selection. Over the last 150 years, scientists have found various evidence that supports the theory, but not enough to definitively prove it. Intelligent design has no uniquely supporting evidence, but instead attempts simply to discredit Evolution.
Based on this, the judge decided that Intelligent Design should not be considered scientific, and thus cannot be presented as an alternative to Evolution. Of course the this decision was met with mixed feelings — with proponents of Intelligent Design upset, and proponents of Evolution feeling affirmed.
Now, setting aside the fallout from this particular decision (the condemnation of Dover, PA by Pat Roberson, the judge being placed under protection due to death threats, the typical Evangelical Right response to criticism… too far?), what I found to be really intriguing was the case itself. As a Christian, I was taught that Creationism was right, and Evolution was wrong. To believe the book of Genesis at face value, and ignore any evidence that supposedly affirmed Darwin’s theory.
As I watched this story, knowing very little about the science behind Evolution, I found it increasingly difficult to simply dismiss the evidence that seemingly backs up Darwin’s theory, and increasingly more difficult to get behind the pseudo-science of Intelligent Design / Creationism. But at the same time, I was (and still am) unwilling to give up my belief in God’s story of creation.
This got me to thinking, and it is these thoughts that I will leave you with…
Could there be an alternate theory of how life began that the evidence also supports?…
Could it be that all the evidence of evolution really does is show how connected life actually is?…
Should science even factor into the question of the origin of life?…
If you sincerely believe something, does it really matter what the world thinks about your beliefs? I mean, they are yours, aren’t they?
get fed this blog
Hi – I just found your blog today when I googled about jogging and hills (your fitness program is very similar to mine, and I have trouble with one particular hill…) But then I saw this post and wondered why no one has responded. I hope you don’t mind that I’d like to comment. I’m a Christian, raised with similar beliefs but also studied anthropology. I think the theory I am most comfortable with is that taking the story of creation in Genesis at its face value, i.e. God created this or that in seven human-length days is not exactly what it is we are meant to do. Evolution of animals, plants, etc makes far more sense if you apply the force of God behind its premise (presumably the “intelligent force” mentioned in ID?) but even though I’ve studied the theories on the evolution of man, I’m not convinced they are correct. One question in particular stands out in my mind in regard to that theory: where does man go from here? If God created us in his image (presumably via all those millions of years beginning as apes…) is he done now? Are we the end product or are we still evolving? Was it truly his physical image that was referred to in Genesis or is it actually those unique things that separates us from all else on the planet? Okay, that’s more than one question isn’t it? It certainly is a topic that one can lose oneself in for quite a time…
“Are we the end product or are we still evolving?”
I would suggest a reading of “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn.
It explores the thinking of man NOT being the end of an evolution, but only a current state.
-joshua.b
Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation
Anyway … nice blog to visit.
cheers, Flatten.