Well, the factual status of evolution isn't quite as solid as many people believe. Even so, compared to 'intelligent design' it's certainly a well-established theory with a lot of collaborating evidence.
I think it's appropriate to teach intelligent design as well, but it's currently more of a philosophy than a scientific theory. I'm sure I remember a quote from when I was a kid, something like "If you can't measure it using numbers, it's not science".
Hrm... yeah, that must be a quote from someone well-known - this guy practically says the same thing a few times in his testimony, like it's some kind of fundamental point he has to get across.
Could it be John Locke? I know he clamed that "Natural philosophy is not capable of being made a science". Hmm But Karl Popper was also on to the same and ideas..
So much of science is still based on theory, I've been reading up on quantum reality recently. I still think there heas to be room for all opinions and beliefs, what ever they are based on. And the fact that I totally disagree doesn't even come into it ;)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-10 11:19 am (UTC)I think it's appropriate to teach intelligent design as well, but it's currently more of a philosophy than a scientific theory. I'm sure I remember a quote from when I was a kid, something like "If you can't measure it using numbers, it's not science".
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-10 11:21 am (UTC)http://www.creationists.org/Steven%20Edinger.html
Worth reading just for the last few answers :)
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-10 01:47 pm (UTC)I know he clamed that "Natural philosophy is not capable of being made a science".
Hmm
But Karl Popper was also on to the same and ideas..
(no subject)
Date: 2005-08-10 01:29 pm (UTC)And the fact that I totally disagree doesn't even come into it ;)