---Creation Science Newsletter---
Co -Founders: Nick & Teri Lally & RoseAnn Salanitri
WHAT IS INTELLIGENT DESIGN?
By
RoseAnn Salanitri
Since President Bush commented on bringing
Intelligent Design (ID) into the school system, many
people have been asking what exactly is ID. The ID
movement needs to be understood philosophically as
well as scientifically. The barrage of insults by
evolutionists lobbed at those in this movement as
being ill informed hypocrites who will set science back
150 years has escalated. Let’s be entirely clear: The
evolution/intelligent design debate, as well as the
Biblical creation debate, is a philosophical argument
that places science in the middle.
ID is a very misunderstood concept. It is NOT
Biblical creationism, even though it assumes that an
intelligent designer must exist. Those supporting
Genesis believe that designer is God, but others in the
ID movement have entertained the possibility of space
aliens or other equally absurd designers. ID explores
the intricate design elements inherent in all living
things at all levels. Since these designs are often
detailed and contain multi-levels of information, the
concept assumes that an intelligent designer is
required. This movement has done its best to
disassociate itself from creationism in an effort to
maintain its impartiality and autonomy. If the student
were to infer the existence of God based on ID, then so
be it, but theism is not the objective of ID. The science
in the ID movement does not argue the existence of
God anymore than the evolution movement argues the
non-existence of God – although both seem to infer it
one way or the other. Hence, if evolution is allowed in
a publicly-funded school system, ID should also be
allowed. Again, if ID isn’t allowed in the school system
because it indirectly infers theism, then evolution
shouldn’t be allowed because it indirectly infers
atheism – both promote philosophical conclusions. To
allow one and disallow the other is hypocritical at the
very least.
Biblical creationism, on the other hand, teaches
that Genesis is scientifically supportable and God does
exist. Evolution, ID, and Biblical creationism all use
science to argue their points, and all infer either the
existence or non-existence of a designer/creator.
Although some try to compromise the issue, the fact is
that creationism and evolution can’t both be true. ID
makes no such claim.
Evolution has enjoyed a stronghold in academia,
censoring any argument that contradicts it, leaving the
believer with a choice: either abandon their faith in
light of evolutionary arguments, or look deeper at the
arguments to see if they are all they claim to be.
Creationists have chosen the latter. Thus, after 100
years of suppression, scientific creationism was born -
and the abundance of its findings has astounded even
the most ardent believer. However, these findings (no
matter how scientifically pure they may be) have a
tough time finding their way into the public forum that
is dominated by evolutionists.
ID, however, should be supported by creationists,
since it opens the door for freedom of thought and
discussions about origins. It is disturbing how many
creationists see ID as a compromise when it is the only
avenue in public science classes that allows free
speech. Free speech is good! While it is not the pot of
gold at the end of the academic rainbow for
creationists, it clearly challenges naturalism, which
has tyrannically reigned in America’s classrooms for
decades. The challenge it presents for naturalism is
the very reason it is so feared by evolutionists.
Co -Founders: Nick & Teri Lally & RoseAnn Salanitri
WHAT IS INTELLIGENT DESIGN?
By
RoseAnn Salanitri
Since President Bush commented on bringing
Intelligent Design (ID) into the school system, many
people have been asking what exactly is ID. The ID
movement needs to be understood philosophically as
well as scientifically. The barrage of insults by
evolutionists lobbed at those in this movement as
being ill informed hypocrites who will set science back
150 years has escalated. Let’s be entirely clear: The
evolution/intelligent design debate, as well as the
Biblical creation debate, is a philosophical argument
that places science in the middle.
ID is a very misunderstood concept. It is NOT
Biblical creationism, even though it assumes that an
intelligent designer must exist. Those supporting
Genesis believe that designer is God, but others in the
ID movement have entertained the possibility of space
aliens or other equally absurd designers. ID explores
the intricate design elements inherent in all living
things at all levels. Since these designs are often
detailed and contain multi-levels of information, the
concept assumes that an intelligent designer is
required. This movement has done its best to
disassociate itself from creationism in an effort to
maintain its impartiality and autonomy. If the student
were to infer the existence of God based on ID, then so
be it, but theism is not the objective of ID. The science
in the ID movement does not argue the existence of
God anymore than the evolution movement argues the
non-existence of God – although both seem to infer it
one way or the other. Hence, if evolution is allowed in
a publicly-funded school system, ID should also be
allowed. Again, if ID isn’t allowed in the school system
because it indirectly infers theism, then evolution
shouldn’t be allowed because it indirectly infers
atheism – both promote philosophical conclusions. To
allow one and disallow the other is hypocritical at the
very least.
Biblical creationism, on the other hand, teaches
that Genesis is scientifically supportable and God does
exist. Evolution, ID, and Biblical creationism all use
science to argue their points, and all infer either the
existence or non-existence of a designer/creator.
Although some try to compromise the issue, the fact is
that creationism and evolution can’t both be true. ID
makes no such claim.
Evolution has enjoyed a stronghold in academia,
censoring any argument that contradicts it, leaving the
believer with a choice: either abandon their faith in
light of evolutionary arguments, or look deeper at the
arguments to see if they are all they claim to be.
Creationists have chosen the latter. Thus, after 100
years of suppression, scientific creationism was born -
and the abundance of its findings has astounded even
the most ardent believer. However, these findings (no
matter how scientifically pure they may be) have a
tough time finding their way into the public forum that
is dominated by evolutionists.
ID, however, should be supported by creationists,
since it opens the door for freedom of thought and
discussions about origins. It is disturbing how many
creationists see ID as a compromise when it is the only
avenue in public science classes that allows free
speech. Free speech is good! While it is not the pot of
gold at the end of the academic rainbow for
creationists, it clearly challenges naturalism, which
has tyrannically reigned in America’s classrooms for
decades. The challenge it presents for naturalism is
the very reason it is so feared by evolutionists.