The New York Times magazine published a critique of so-called “Intelligent Design”. That’s the argument that life around us is far to marvelous to have been created “randomly”. Naturally, then it must have had a designer.
If that sounds familiar, it’s because it was first offered by Darwin’s early opponents as an argument against evolution. Even though the idea of a Divine Designer was soundly discredited long ago, today’s creationists have resurrected and renamed the idea, and offered it up to school boards across the country.
What can we tell about the designer from the design? While there is much that is marvelous in nature, there is also much that is flawed, sloppy and downright bizarre.
[...]This year, Kansas school boards have tried to promote “Intelligent Design” and discredit evolution in their schools. [...]
[...] In a statement sure to please his religious-right supporters, President Bush has said that schools should teach both evolution and intelligent design. Asked again by a reporter whether he believed that both sides in the debate between evolution and intelligent design should be taught in the schools, Mr. Bush replied that he did, “so people can understand what the debate is about.” Mr. Bush was pressed as to whether he accepted the view that intelligent design was an alternative to evolution, but he did not directly answer. “I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought,” he said, adding that “you’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.” [...]
[...] Many newspapers are writing stories about the upcoming trial in Dover Pennsylvania, in which parents have sued the school board for requiring that “Intelligent Design” be taught alongside evolution in science classes. The lawsuit argues that teaching creationism in schools amounts to state-sponsored religion. The Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creation science in public schools was unconstitutional because it was based on religion. So the plaintiffs will try to prove that intelligent design is creationism in a new package. Richard Katskee, assistant legal director of Americans United, said the “Pandas” textbook only substituted references to “creationism” with “intelligent design” in more recent editions. [...]