Court Rejects Intelligent Design

2 Flares Twitter 2 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 StumbleUpon 0 Email -- 2 Flares ×

The verdict is in, and intelligent design is out. CNN reports:

“‘Intelligent design’ cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.”

I know the LDS church doesn’t have an official policy one way or the other, but I’m curious what readers of Our Thoughts think about the decision.

26 thoughts on “Court Rejects Intelligent Design

  1. I curious as to why the church hasn’t come out with a definitive statement in regard to evolution.

    The fact that anyone would consider teaching this sort of nonsense is incomprehensible to me.

  2. My faith in the judiciary took a small but unmistakeable step forward today.

  3. I think that the reason that the church hasn’ come out with a definitive stand on evolution is because there hasn’t been any definitive revelation reagarding it.

    I am not sure that I accept evolution as it is taught today. There are too many variables.

    At the same time, I trust in Science. Our understanding of Science is incomplete as of now. The best science we know today is evolution. Current scientific unserstanding is what we should teach in schools.

    I think that anyone who accepts the Bible beleives in intellegent design. The notion that God created the earth, whether through the literal 7 day creation or a millions of years understanding.

    But the question is, do we have enough scientific evidence to teach that in schools? What are the scientific evidences of the intellegent design theory? I am willing to bet that there isn’t any evidence of this, therefore we shouldn’t be teaching it in schools.

    My two cents.

  4. a rose by any other name is still that.. a rose.. at times we don’t always need to know the whys and how comes … we just need to know and believe…

    I mean there are scientific studies coming out the whazoo stating there is no workshop at the North Pole big enough to make toys for all the billions of children all over the world.. no one can prove it exists but that does not mean that Santa isn’t real or that he doesn’t exist.. you just have to at times believe :)

    I don’t need to know whether God created the earth in 7 actual days or in millions of years I just need to know He did. You could never convince me we came from apes otherwise why would there still be apes? Mind you if you look at Joan Rivers and look at the shape of her face she really has the facial characteristics of apes

  5. We don’t come from apes because apes and humans are as different from one another as wolves and foxes are different. Foxes didn’t evolve from wolves and humans did not evolved from apes.

  6. “You could never convince me we came from apes otherwise why would there still be apes?”

    It’s precisely this type of characterization of evolution which bothers people. Unfortunately it has absolutely nothing to do with how evolution works.

    I think ID is actually a symptom of a larger problem, that being the tendency of people to state opinions on topics that they have no actual expertise in.

    It’s fine if you explain that you are speculating, but too often we hear conclusive statements from people who simply aren’t educated enough that topic to offer an informed opinion.

  7. hmmmmmmmmm so Rick are you speculating that I am not intelligent enough to make an informed opinion?

  8. Sally, I think it’s less about intelligence than having studied the debate. Evolution doesn’t claim man came from apes but rather both share a common ancestor. With mistakes that big it suggests you’ve not really studied the issues very well. No offense and no reflection on your intelligence. But what you said is about on par with someone saying they are informed and intelligence about Mormonism and know all about how we worship Brigham Young as God.

  9. ID is great in religion, but it’s unfathomable that some people believe it to be science.

    As my brother said last week, “ID is creationism in wolf’s clothing.”

  10. Clark,

    Nice retort, but now I am put in the position of recognizing my absolute ignorance.
    However, since you are a scientist perhaps you can clear something up for me.
    You mentioned that men and apes have a common ancestor. If we go back far enough in that logic sequence, can we find that the ape and the do-do bird had a common ancestor as well; and if continued back far enough everything had a common ancestor – i.e. the one celled amoeba or whatever?
    Just curious.

  11. Mum,

    I believe what Rick implied was that you are not educated enough on the subject of evolution, not that you’re unintelligent altogether.

  12. I’m fron Canadian.Mormon and on the matter i have a quote from Joseph F. Smith, “A man who believes that man has descended from lower forms of life and by gradual development, after an enormous lenght of time, evolved from fish to reptile and then to ape, can never understand the fall of man and the atonement.”

    It was taken from the Book of Mormon Study guide and although it doesn’t state the position on the church (probably as ian said because there was not a revelation regarding it) it gives us a pretty good idea lol

  13. so my one comment here shows I am not educated enough,,, interesting.. I wonder if that came from speculating or an informed decision

  14. At the same time, Val, Joseph F. Smith also said:

    “Whether the mortal bodies of man evolved in natural processes to present perfection, through the direction and power of God; whether the first parents of our generations, Adam and Eve, were transplanted from another sphere, with immortal tabernacles, which became corrupted through sin and the partaking of natural foods, in the process of time; whether they were born here in mortality, as other mortals have been, are questions not fully answered in the revealed word of God.” (Improvement Era, Vol. 13, April 1910, No. 5(70), “Priesthood Quorum’s Table”)

  15. no.. what I said was you could never convince me we descended from apes not that I believed we came from them. It has nothing whatsoever to do with my intelligence or education.

    How does anyone reading these posts know how educated I am on this topic? Because I made one comment I get lumped in the general consensus category of not knowing what I am talking about?

    How magnanimous of you!!

  16. Sorry Sally, only the first paragraph of my reply was specifically meant for you…I wouldn’t ‘lump you in’ with anyone.

    Kim hit the nail on the head in regard to my stance on educating one’s self before jumping into any debate.

  17. “what I said was you could never convince me we descended from apes not that I believed we came from them.”

    Right, but no one is trying to convince you that we came from apes. Creationists don’t believe it and evolutionists don’t believe it. By making the above statement, you suggested that someone is (or would be) trying to convince you we descended from apes.

    The evolutionists that have commented assumed you were referring to them.

  18. Sally, I’ve just re-read my followup post (20/12/05 16:18) and I realize that I might have come off like I was calling you unintelligent.

    Please accept my sincerest apologies, that’s really not was I was trying to get at. It was a poorly worded post and I’m sorry.

  19. Sally, the reason you seem unfamiliar with the terms of the debate over evolution is that, as Kim and others have pointed out, evolution doesn’t claim that humans descended from apes. This idea is out of place in a debate over evolution, and in fact is usually present only in discussions at the television sitcom or radio talk show level. If you were making a joke about those discussion contexts, then people are wrong about your level of information about the evolution debate. However, if you sincerely believe that evolution teaches that humans descended from apes, then the commenters are correct: you don’t yet have enough information to meaningfully participate in the debate.

    That’s not the end of the world; all of us have limits to our information. Nor need it be a permanent situation. You could read a book on evolution (Stephen Jay Gould is often readable) and then be in a situation where you have the tools necessary to make an informed decision. But it’s a bit risky to take a strong position on the basis of limited information.

  20. roastedtomatoes:” you don’t yet have enough information to meaningfully participate in the debate.”

    gee first I am uneducated then I am unintelligent now am unable to meaningfully debate a topic of converstaion…. if readers would actually READ my lines of my post instead of trying to read BETWEEN the lines you would have all read that I stated no one could ever convince me we came from apes. At no time did I say I was talking about Intellectual design OR Evolution theories… I just made a comment based on years of listening to others in DEBATES stating we came from apes. At no time did I say I was commented on either ID or the actual evolution theory.

    I am a very patient low keyed person but to have my intelligence, my education and my ability to join in a conversation come under “speculation”… well all I will say is :-P (icon for sticking out my tongue)after all my doing that should fit what I have been categorized as.

  21. Sally, I’m unable to meaningfully debate most topics. We’re all in that boat.

  22. just my 2 cents
    :goD created man after his own image
    :man uses tools
    :evolutionary theory at this point has been tested and has not yet proven to be false
    :who is to say that goD didn’t use evolution as a tool in creating this earth?
    my LDS ap biology teacher always approached it with the idea that :”truth fits”

Comments are closed.