Bush backs Intelligent Design

[Falls City Beer]

But read carefully: Bush "backs" intelligent design but uses mouthpiece Marburger to appeal to the non-whacko Republican base. Pretty humorous.

Bush Remarks Roil Debate on Teaching of Evolution
By ELISABETH BUMILLER

WASHINGTON, Aug. 2 - A sharp debate between scientists and religious conservatives escalated Tuesday over comments by President Bush that the theory of intelligent design should be taught with evolution in the nation's public schools.

In an interview at the White House on Monday with a group of Texas newspaper reporters, Mr. Bush appeared to endorse the push by many of his conservative Christian supporters to give intelligent design equal treatment with the theory of evolution.

Recalling his days as Texas governor, Mr. Bush said in the interview, according to a transcript, "I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught." 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."

On Tuesday, the president's conservative Christian supporters and the leading institute advancing intelligent design embraced Mr. Bush's comments while scientists and advocates of the separation of church and state disparaged them. At the White House, where intelligent design has been discussed in a weekly Bible study group, Mr. Bush's science adviser, John H. Marburger 3rd, sought to play down the president's remarks as common sense and old news.

Mr. Marburger said in a telephone interview that "evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology" and "intelligent design is not a scientific concept." Mr. Marburger also said that Mr. Bush's remarks should be interpreted to mean that the president believes that intelligent design should be discussed as part of the "social context" in science classes.

Intelligent design, advanced by a group of academics and intellectuals and some biblical creationists, disputes the idea that natural selection - the force Charles Darwin suggested drove evolution - fully explains the complexity of life. Instead, intelligent design proponents say that life is so intricate that only a powerful guiding force, or intelligent designer, could have created it.

Intelligent design does not identify the designer, but critics say the theory is a thinly disguised argument for God and the divine creation of the universe. Invigorated by a recent push by conservatives, the theory has been gaining support in school districts in 20 states, with Kansas in the lead.

Mr. Marburger said it would be "over-interpreting" Mr. Bush's remarks to say that the president believed that intelligent design and evolution should be given equal treatment in schools.

But Mr. Bush's conservative supporters said the president had indicated exactly that in his remarks.

"It's what I've been pushing, it's what a lot of us have been pushing," said Richard Land, the president of the ethics and religious liberties commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Dr. Land, who has close ties to the White House, said that evolution "is too often taught as fact," and that "if you're going to teach the Darwinian theory as evolution, teach it as theory. And then teach another theory that has the most support among scientists."

But critics saw Mr. Bush's comment that "both sides" should be taught as the most troubling aspect of his remarks.

"It sounds like you're being fair, but creationism is a sectarian religious viewpoint, and intelligent design is a sectarian religious viewpoint," said Susan Spath, a spokeswoman for the National Center for Science Education, a group that defends the teaching of evolution in public schools. "It's not fair to privilege one religious viewpoint by calling it the other side of evolution."

Ms. Spath added that intelligent design was viewed as more respectable and sophisticated than biblical creationism, but "if you look at their theological and scientific writings, you see that the movement is fundamentally anti-evolution."

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the president's comments irresponsible, and said that "when it comes to evolution, there is only one school of scientific thought, and that is evolution occurred and is still occurring." Mr. Lynn added that "when it comes to matters of religion and philosophy, they can be discussed objectively in public schools, but not in biology class."

The Discovery Institute in Seattle, a leader in developing intelligent design, applauded the president's words on Tuesday as a defense of scientists who have been ostracized for advancing the theory.

"We interpret this as the president using his bully pulpit to support freedom of inquiry and free speech about the issue of biological origins," said Stephen Meyer, the director of the institute's Center for Science and Culture. "It's extremely timely and welcome because so many scientists are experiencing recriminations for breaking with Darwinist orthodoxy."

At the White House, intelligent design was the subject of a weekly Bible study class several years ago when Charles W. Colson, the founder and chairman of Prison Fellowship Ministries, spoke to the group. Mr. Colson has also written a book, "The Good Life," in which a chapter on intelligent design features Michael Gerson, an evangelical Christian who is an assistant to the president for policy and strategic planning.

"It's part of the buzz of the city among Christians," Mr. Colson said in a telephone interview on Tuesday about intelligent design. "It wouldn't surprise me that it got to George Bush. He reads, he picks stuff up, he talks to people. And he's pretty serious about his own Christian beliefs."

[KronoRed]

I went to public school, got taught evolution, am a Christian and don't think it's horrible or evil that I was taught evolution.

I have no idea how it all works out..it's in my list of questions for when I get to heaven, right after "Why Skunks?!?"

[paintmered]

I was taught neither of them. My teacher didn't make a big deal out of it. It wasn't a big deal to me or any of my classmates either.

I lived.

[creek14]

It's been so long since I was in school, I don't even remember what we were taught. Had a big effect on me.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by creek14

It's been so long since I was in school, I don't even remember what we were taught. Had a big effect on me.

Duck and cover.... endorsed by all.

[pedro]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Duck and cover.... endorsed by all.

[Unassisted]

Teachers probably won't have time to teach either of these if they don't appear on a state proficiency test.

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by Unassisted

Teachers probably won't have time to teach either of these if they don't appear on a state proficiency test.

Or the ACT/SAT. It's one of the benefits of a disinterested scientific test. It cuts both ways. Trust me, the Princeton Review's going to tell these fruitcakes to go jump in a lake.

[Caveat Emperor]

For a universe supposedly constructed on "Intelligent Design" there's a lot of stuff that just doesn't make any sense...

I tend to quote a bumper sticker I saw once:

"You promise not to pray in my schools
I promise not to think your church"

[pedro]

How ironic.

[creek14]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Duck and cover.... endorsed by all.

Oh yeah, I remember that. Even at age 8 I was wondering how in the heck that was going to protect us.

[M2]

Being the science advisor to the Bush administration must be a little like being the Jewish community affairs advocate for the Spanish Inquisition.

[traderumor]

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called the president's comments irresponsible, and said that "when it comes to evolution, there is only one school of scientific thought, and that is evolution occurred and is still occurring." Mr. Lynn added that "when it comes to matters of religion and philosophy, they can be discussed objectively in public schools, but not in biology class."

Speaking of irresponsible...that's Mr. Lynn's opinion, and yes, I said OPINION. Does he mean micro evolution or macro evolution? Does he have any scientific evidence that is occurring as we speak? Oh, that's right, we need millions of years, you can't actually see anything happening, but then I forgot the fossil record and the various missing link frauds that have been trotted out, but I digress.

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Speaking of irresponsible...that's Mr. Lynn's opinion, and yes, I said OPINION. Does he mean micro evolution or macro evolution? Does he have any scientific evidence that is occurring as we speak? Oh, that's right, we need millions of years, you can't actually see anything happening, but then I forgot the fossil record and the various missing link frauds that have been trotted out, but I digress.

I can't argue that Mr Lynn's point is an opinion. It is.

But what isn't an opinion is that the science used to help bolster the *theory* of evolution is based in rigorous scientific method and inquiry.

The "science" of intelligent design dispenses almost entirely with the scientific method and leaps to conclusions that only a religious kind of faith could brook.

That's the substantive difference. And that's not opinion.

[Ravenlord]

But what isn't an opinion is that the science used to help bolster the *theory* of evolution is based in rigorous scientific method and inquiry.

The "science" of intelligent design dispenses almost entirely with the scientific method and leaps to conclusions that only a religious kind of faith could brook.

yet i see the exact opposite of that.