It sounds like Super Smash Brothers at first (if you’ve ever played), as any good court case does - but this is the infamous discussion on the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.
What I know about ID (intelligent design) so far (PLEASE correct me if I’m wrong and feel free to add):
Intelligent design is a theory that came into use after the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District case on the teaching of “creation science” alongside evolution. It is based upon how complex life is. People who believe in ID believe that something as complex as, for example, a protein pump wouldn’t be possible without an intelligent being to guide the development of such things. ID is currently a very controversial topic - while some people believe that ID is valid and should be taught, others believe that ID is completely untrue. There are also many people in between who have many different views - one of these may be that ID is not necessarily true however to get a complete perspective students should be taught ID as one option, in case they choose to believe it.
Personally I believe intelligent design is a load of hooey (gotta love that word). To survive, creationism evolved into intelligent design. On a more practical note, we can actually see evolution in action in many types of bacteria.
I can see it from the other point of view though. How could little cellular machines like this do so much?
But then again there’s the obvious. Where else could fossils and geology and all the other evidence that’s rock hard (excuse the pun) come from? It’d be impossible for “non-believers” to fake something like fossils on such a large scale as this planet.
Jesus lovingly cradles a baby raptor.
I suppose you could say that fossils changing is the intelligent designer making changes to his design… just like Bill Gates changing Vista to fix it. Too bad you have to argue for it.
The problem, Chuckly, is that Vista is not intelligent. We can apply this to ID too. I’ve actually read some good arguements for ID however all of them have easily been disproved.
@Anyone who’s reading this - as you may know from reading Chuckly’s comment I have to argue FOR intelligent design being taught in public schools. If you know ANYONE who strongly believes in intelligent design PLEASE email, comment, or contact me in some way. As I said in the post, I believe ID is a load of hooey - therfor I have NO idea how to argue it!
/gradster(1)/
It is going to be really hard to argue that when there is :
1. No real proof of a higher being.
2. No real evidence against evolution
3. No real evidence supporting ID.
But as I said earlier, you could make the claim that Evolution is really “God” making changes to the design of the animal, like a graphic designer making changes to his design (Hope this analogy works). It also could depend on who you are debating against, and who your debate partner is. If you are debating against two stupid people, you have a better chance of winning. Also, if you don’t spend your whole time saying “their idea is really stupid”, you won’t give them extra attention, therefore making their idea seem better to the general audience (but you probably heard that already). Other than that, all I can say is “Good luck!”, and wish you the best. Have fun with that debate!