Introducing the evolution / creationism /
intelligent design controversy, however obliquely, into an already politicized discussion seems unnecessarily provocative.
Twenty years ago, as a PhD scientist, I intensely studied the evolution versus
intelligent design controversy for about two years.
As with
the intelligent design controversy, agenda - driven opposition has often managed to cloak its contrarianism with the mantle of scepticism.
Not exact matches
... Just the
intelligent design folks trying to create
controversy when there is none... If he did his job, he would have not been fired...
The current dialogue between religion and science seems to be dominated by the
intelligent design (ID)
controversy.
The
intelligent design movement is exceptionally good at creating false
controversies and misconceptions.
It offers links to pages for creationism and
intelligent design but makes no mention of
controversy.
Instead, the institute advocates «teaching the
controversy» — a legally safer approach, in which schools present Darwinism as controversial without endorsing
intelligent design.
A lifelong observer of, and participant in, the creation - evolution
controversy, I was struck by how clear the solution is in these islands: creation by
intelligent design is absurd.
While
controversy over the science requirements turned this lawsuit into another story about evolution and
intelligent design for many in the media, the case is, in fact, about much more.
What about
intelligent design, or the MMR vaccine / autism «
controversy»?
Nick is only partially right, I think, about current
controversy over Christianity in court, at least in the US, as witness recent cases on «
intelligent design».