This morning I read an interview with Ben Stein about a new movie he is working on, which is intended to increase public awareness of a supposed hypocrisy in the scientific community: the censorship of the Theory of Intelligent Design. I haven't seen the movie yet so I don't have any opinions on it at the moment. However, I do have an issue with the premise of the movie.
While it's true that scientists who study biology and genetics often refuse to even consider intelligent design as a possibility, the idea is not shunned or censored. Instead, intelligent design is simply discounted because most think that it falls in the realm of religion or philosophy, not science. This is where the problem lies. For proponents of intelligent design, it appears that they are being censored and that the scientific community is not upholding it's responsibility to investigate all possible answers. To scientists, proponent of intelligent design are trying to promote their beliefs by mixing religion with science. It's an argument that's never going to end. Faith doesn't require evidence and evidence isn't always going to support faith.
Personally, I think evolution is the right answer. Most researchers who study biology, genetics, and related fields agree that evolution is how complex life came to be. The existence of a few fringe biologists who disagree doesn't mean there isn't a consensus. Similarly, the opinions of scientists and people who don't do scientific research on the origins of life are not as relevant as those who do. The people who have more knowledge about the existing evidence have more relevant opinions. Also, just because the best theory of evolution we currently have doesn't explain all the evidence doesn't mean that no theory of evolution can explain all the evidence. As more evidence accumulates, scientists will revise their theories. Although, it is possible that the evidence may someday make intelligent design a more attractive theory. It is a very remote possibility.
While it's true that scientists who study biology and genetics often refuse to even consider intelligent design as a possibility, the idea is not shunned or censored. Instead, intelligent design is simply discounted because most think that it falls in the realm of religion or philosophy, not science. This is where the problem lies. For proponents of intelligent design, it appears that they are being censored and that the scientific community is not upholding it's responsibility to investigate all possible answers. To scientists, proponent of intelligent design are trying to promote their beliefs by mixing religion with science. It's an argument that's never going to end. Faith doesn't require evidence and evidence isn't always going to support faith.
Personally, I think evolution is the right answer. Most researchers who study biology, genetics, and related fields agree that evolution is how complex life came to be. The existence of a few fringe biologists who disagree doesn't mean there isn't a consensus. Similarly, the opinions of scientists and people who don't do scientific research on the origins of life are not as relevant as those who do. The people who have more knowledge about the existing evidence have more relevant opinions. Also, just because the best theory of evolution we currently have doesn't explain all the evidence doesn't mean that no theory of evolution can explain all the evidence. As more evidence accumulates, scientists will revise their theories. Although, it is possible that the evidence may someday make intelligent design a more attractive theory. It is a very remote possibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment