05 Mar '12 05:01>
The unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design
is not science and has no place in a science curriculum. The U.S. National
Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other
claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not
science because they are not testable by the methods of science." The U.S.
National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the
dvancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience. Others in the scientific
community have denounced its tactics, accusing the ID movement of
manufacturing false attacks against evolution, of engaging in misinformation
and misrepresentation about science, and marginalizing those who teach it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
However, they have no objection to the theory of evolution from a common
ancestor being included in the science cirriculum in education even though
it is not testable by the methods of science. This is pure prejudice in action.
is not science and has no place in a science curriculum. The U.S. National
Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other
claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not
science because they are not testable by the methods of science." The U.S.
National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the
dvancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience. Others in the scientific
community have denounced its tactics, accusing the ID movement of
manufacturing false attacks against evolution, of engaging in misinformation
and misrepresentation about science, and marginalizing those who teach it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
However, they have no objection to the theory of evolution from a common
ancestor being included in the science cirriculum in education even though
it is not testable by the methods of science. This is pure prejudice in action.