Creation Science and Intelligent Design--Science or not?

There is no such thing as creation science, nor intelligent design. Even the US Supreme court ruled that intelligent design is Not science.

A scientific theory is an explanation of facts we see or know to be true. A well excepted scientific theory is one that has an in-depth explanation that has existed for a good number of years, and it is generally understood by the experts within that field of study.

The problem with creationism is there is no explanation. It basically just says “God made everything” and is based on a very specific (literal) interpretation of the Bible. (An interpretation that many Christians disagree with for purely theological reasons.)

Intelligent design is a little different, but can be reduced to a similar notion. Intelligent design, in a nut shell, says “It is difficult to understand how complicated-thing-X could have come about purely by nature; it looks designed. It is too complex. Therefore some sort of intelligent designer must have made it.”

The problem with this is several fold:

1) This, first and foremost, is not an explanation. It is an assertion, but doesn’t bother to explain how the thing was created. Even if intelligent design were true, it would not be a scientific theory.

2) The assertion is essentially an Argument by Incredulity which is a logical fallacy. (A simpler example of Argument from Incredulity: “I don’t understand how a Christian could be racist…therefore all Christians must not be racist.”) Just because you don’t understand how a complicated thing could still function with reduced complexity, doesn’t mean it wouldn’t.

It should also be noted that most people who are design proponents are Christians who happen to like a literal interpretation of the Bible.

A book on creationism was once written for a class, and before it was published creationism was deemed unacceptable to be taught in public schools. So the creationists decided to change the book to be about intelligent design instead. They barely had to change anything, which is very telling. In fact, for one part, they tried to change “creationists” to “design proponents” and accidentally had “cdesign proponentists” which is described as the “missing link” between creationism and intelligent design! ;)

(My story here about the book being changed may be a little incorrect, as I'm doing this from memory. See my source for a more in-depth look at this, as well as a great look at intelligent design being on trial in Dover!)

Many consider intelligent design to simply be a crafty re-working of creationism.

Not that it matters. Neither is a scientific theory because neither has the power to explain.

Both the biblical account of creation and "Intelligent Design" are proof that either God is imaginary, or that He is an idiot (in which case He must not really be "God"); if the biblical account was true, this would prove that God believed in night & day BEFORE he created the Sun, since biblically He did not set the Sun and the stars in the sky until the fourth day. (Genesis 1:14-19). If the Creationist account is true, and God created creatures as they are now (and no evolution has subsequently occurred), then one must conclude that God gave male mammals purposeless nipples, and that He created the Guinea Worm specifically to blind infant babies....neither of these seem like reasonable mistakes for "God" to make, do they?

The "supernatural" has no place in science, it is in fact science's "job" to examine any so-called supernatural event until it is understood in terms of current scientific knowledge.

ID has nothing to do with creation. Those are two separate ideas.

Science has nothing to do with creation. If God is real and He did create everything- science can not address it.

ID is a scientific theory that came about over 50 years ago, and is not a creationist idea. The "ministers" at ICR all have Ph.D's in a hard science, and some are minsters also. The Discovery Institute did not exist when ID came along. And I doubt anyone at Discovery Institute is a minister.

Creationism and ID are the same thing. Neither is anywhere close to being science. There have been no peer-reviewed articles for creationism. No observation. Not one shred of evidence for it.

you notice, each and every time any technique if got here across, throughout the scientific concept of "Godidit!", you're consistently a hundred% miraculous. the subject is waiting for actual scientists to do the paintings, then you definately declare it interior the call of your faith. Edit: "and that they have no answer to the polonium halos which contradict their evolutionary theories." Rofl. while grew to become into geography area of evolution, genius. You did no longer provide a unmarried occasion of ways advent helped to describe new info - you in certainty gave a eye-catching occasion of Godidit! Scientists are incorrect! "each and every of the regulation of nature element to an all-powerful, sensible clothier" No, they element to a blind tinkerer. learn some easily regulations of nature first.

Neither ID or CS is science. They are both failures.