Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Naturally, he's a chip off the old DNA
(By Amy Worden, Philadelphia Inquirer, October 26, 2005)
HARRISBURG - Charles Darwin might not be in the federal courtroom to hear witnesses challenge his theory of evolution. But his DNA is.
As one of Darwin's most vocal modern-day critics testified in a landmark lawsuit last week, the eminent scientist's great-great-grandson sat six feet away in the jury-box-turned-press box.
In the courtroom, Matthew Chapman, a New York author and screenwriter, is one of the 75 people from the United States and abroad covering the Dover, Pa., school board trial, the first court proceeding ever on the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution.
But outside the court, Chapman recognizes that he plays other roles: lightning rod for supporters of intelligent design and a living connection to the 19th-century scientist whose theories on natural selection and the origin of species provide the foundation for modern biology.
Chapman, 55, a British-born American citizen, says he is stunned that debate continues in some parts of the United States 123 years after Darwin's death and 80 years after the Scopes "monkey trial."
"Evolution is such a nonissue everywhere else in the world," said Chapman, who counts among his screenwriting credits the John Grisham thriller Runaway Jury.
Chapman, who is on assignment for Harper's Magazine and also is working on a documentary for the BBC, has tried to remain an observer on the sidelines, joining the press gaggle, tape recorder in hand, after court each day. He also has been spending time in Dover, talking to students and sitting quietly through what he sees as antievolution speeches by local ministers.
"This is really the first courtroom scientific debate, since science wasn't allowed in the courtroom in the Scopes trial," said Chapman.
Last week, he listened to testimony from the lead witness for the defense - Lehigh University biochemist Michael Behe - and intently scribbled in his notebook.
Behe, author of the bestselling book Darwin's Black Box, testified that what he calls the "purposeful arrangement of parts" in certain biochemical processes is evidence that intelligent design is a scientific idea.
"I'm appalled by the lack of respect for the evidence," Chapman said. "Darwin spent 23 years compiling evidence he gathered to present his theory."

wande-

That goes nowhere near any salient points.

It is of no consequence how many years Darwin spent compiling evidence.If Chapman said it it would demonstrate that intelligence was not evolving in his family tree.I'm surprised Amy's editor allowed it to pass the spike unless he's an IDer but he has no excuse for "and intently scribbled in his notebook."

some supernatural intelligent being has purposefully created certain organisms or parts of organisms.

Going back-I don't think Origin is "the" foundation of modern biology.It is a little less simple than that.

Victoria's government schools will treat intelligent design as a religious faith, not science, Education Minister Lynne Kosky has ruled.
In her first statement on the subject, Ms Kosky reaffirmed the principle that government schools were secular and did not promote any religion.
She said the two areas in which religion could be discussed were optional religious education lessons and VCE studies comparing religions.
"In line with the above principles, schools can decide whether to offer intelligent design as part of religious instruction," Ms Kosky said. "Parents will be given the opportunity to withdraw their child from the lesson." Intelligent design argues that gaps in Darwin's theory of evolution point to an "intelligent designer" of life.
Supporters of the theory, which include US President George Bush argue that the theory is scientific. Critics call it creationism in another guise.
Last week a coalition representing 70,000 Australian scientists and teachers likened it to the flat-earth theory.

fm-It doesn't matter who is funding it.The important thing is that it is being funded and probably from a business perspective.