March 26 06:24 AM
arrow Back

Intelligent Design deserves spot in classroom

To the Editor:

I am a high school senior, and would like to comment on Eric Thuma's column "Backed by science, Darwin's theories still controversial." He said he wanted to "stir up the pot," so here is a reply. My sources are from a documentary entitled 'Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,' my experiences in the world, and from information that some of my teachers have given me.

Personally, I believe in the philosophy of Creationism under the scientific heading of Intelligent Design. Mr. Thuma is right that Creationism is philosophy. However, that does not mean that Intelligent Design is also pure philosophy. If they were identical, then it would be understandable why neither of them can be taught in public institutions. There is a significant difference between the two which is often overlooked, and I would like to make that clear.

Creationism is the belief that the Christian God created the universe and placed life in it following the record found in Genesis, the first book of the Bible. Creationists do not all necessarily take that record literally; they just say that God created the world and everything in it out of nothing, and made man in His likeness and image. Intelligent Design is the belief that the universe was created, set in motion and guided by something, not necessarily God, but that it is not due to pure chance. It has nothing to do with religion. Intelligent Design can be deduced purely from observing and interacting with our complex and balanced physical world. It has a great advantage over evolution. It is rational.

Looking at it from a mathematical point of view, evolution is as near to impossible as one can get. Evolutionists say that life started with single celled organisms, evolved all the way to sentient beings, and from there into the most intelligent thing we have ever physically encountered: a human. How can anyone say that every single living organism is due to pure chance? That every living cell on earth now is the result of billions and billions of freak accidents? The actual odds of something like that happening are so insignificantly small that it is only able to be stated as zero. It seems that it would take generous amounts of blind faith in order to accept the accounts of evolution.

Even the basic principles of evolution contradict themselves. Natural Selection means that the animals with undesirable characteristics will become extinct. Mutations are undesirable. According to this, no new species would be able to come into being, because the mutated characteristics would cause them to succumb to the principles of Natural Selection, and survival of the fittest. Darwin recognized these problems in "The Origin of Species," and said himself that no one would believe him because his arguments were flawed.

Yes, species will and do adapt over time. Selective breeding in livestock is a simple example. Even all present day humans have different physical characteristics. But one species will not turn into another species. This has never been observed. Scientists have tried to replicate evolution in a laboratory, but all resulting organisms are always sterile, and therefore unable to pass on life. If species evolve, why hasn't man grown wings yet? Because that is ridiculous. So is the idea of a monkey turning into a man.

The main problem with evolution is in its explanation of the beginning of life. Life started on the back of some crystals when certain substances were struck by lightning. Sorry, I'm not convinced. I have even heard of hard-core evolutionists saying that there is a possibility of life being placed here on earth by some other entity. In other words: the aliens did it. How is it permissible to teach pure science fiction in today's classrooms, and it is not permissible to even consider an Intelligent Designer? Furthermore, that explanation still does not clarify where life came from in the first place. How did the aliens come alive, in order that they could pass their life on to earth?

It is said that Intelligent Design is not grounded in scientific fact. If there is no proof, it can not be taught, or even considered. Mr. Thuma himself said that evolution has "its grounding in modern scientific thought." Not fact, thought. Evolution is still a theory. Intelligent Design is grounded in the interactions of any human being with the universe. Even if both of them were scientific theories on equal levels, they should both be able to have a place in the public classroom.

In conclusion, I would like to state that while the basis for my personal disbelief in the theory of evolution is because it contradicts my Faith in God, the fact remains that it contradicts reason. Mr. Thuma is correct, it is wrong for Intelligent Design to be considered on a par with evolution. Intelligent Design gives a much more rational and comprehensive explanation for the well-ordered universe in which we live.

Hilary A.E. Long, Imlay Township
March 04, 2009

Castle Creek
Letter Search
03 - 26 - 19
Site Search

Thanks for visiting Tri City Times