TopicEvolution, God and Intelligent Design

  • Mon 20th Feb 2017 - 10:15am

    Lotto Destroyer System

    As if we, as a nation, did not have any major concerns at this time in our history, an old controversy with a new handle is all of a sudden burst upon us. Is it a legitimate concern of some or is it the usual red herring that will substitute other worries of more urgent nature?
    Now we have an organized group of reputed scientists and academicians, encouraged by a Presidential comment about allowing what they call "Intelligent Design" to be taught alongside Evolutionary theory in schools, pointing out that the bases of this latter theory are flawed; that they do not answer the major questions and that they do not offer an acceptable version of the origin of life, somehow suggesting that their Creationist or "Intelligent Design" theory is the right one.
    As we listen to the scientists on the other side of the argument, backed by the world's scientific community and a wealth of scientific facts and evidence whose logic and legitimacy can not be ignored, we can not help but classify the "Intelligent Design" as a sophisticated version of creationism, which is of course closely bound to faith and religious beliefs. We wonder how this is going to affect or alter some of the more fundamental tenets on which our education and personal beliefs are based.

    According to those sold on Creationism, the fact that a major debate is taking place about Evolution versus the so called Intelligent Design, this last introducing the presence of God's all-reaching hand, is proof that God exists. The opposite side argues that the simple fact of holding a debate on this matter does not advance evidence of the presence of God, adding that in this instance a debate is nothing more than a predictable reaction to differences of opinion.
    Recurring to our sheep mentality, decidedly a product of an evolutionary cycle, we can easily side with one or the other facet of the argument; it all depend on the quality of the environment in which we exist and on the nature of the conditioning to which we have been exposed. Few of us devote time to use our mental processes, like thinking, to make an attempt to understand, or at least to become acquainted with the nature of the argument.

Please register or login to post forum replies