Evolution versus Intelligent Design

We had a debate/discussion about evolution and intelligent design on Friday (13th), on which is the driving force behind our existence, behind the world it is today. This topic is probably one of the most debated topics of all time, and from experience, people can argue for extended periods of time about these controversies.

To start off, we all know that evolution describes changes in populations, species, or gruops of species, which then allows for observable changes in individual organisms over time. It is because of evolution that there is so much biodiversity. It is because of evolution that what began as a common ancestor to us all was able to sprout into all these varieties of life we see today. In short, evolution is the sequence of events involved in the development of a species or taxonomic group of organisms.

On the other hand, intelligent design is the assertion that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, and created by an unspecified intelligent agent, a.k.a God. This disregards all the science that comes along with evolution. It simply states that God created everything, and it is because of Him that everything on Earth exists, is, will be, has been, etc.

Personally, I believe in the theory of evolution above all. I am not one to have blind faith or place my trust in something unless there's factual and reasonable evidence to support it. With evolution, we have evidence proven by Darwin, and subsequent evolutionists or even scientists which show that evolution is the driving force behind the life we see today. With the Big Bang theory, as mentioned by some bloggers, the theory states that "our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something- a singularity". (thanks kristen; from http://www.big-bang-theory.com) Although arguers on the side supporting intelligent design may complain that this theory screams of nonsense and ridicule, If the Big Bang theory is something that nobody can truly understand or believe, then doesn't the same apply to God? With the information that science provides, regardless of the fact that we were not there to see the Big Bang, we have evidence, visual evidence of the scientific phenomena which supports our existence. We have evidence that organisms physically changed over time in order to make adaptations to suit the environment; you can't say that all livings things were made to perfectly fit their surroundings. We have evidence of the fossil record, for example, which provides us with tangible evidence that such and such organisms existed at such and such time, which later on became such and such organism. You can say that God created fossils and God created evertyhing, okay, "but since all its answers are usually "God", scientists have rejected it" (as the article from Friday states). I don't feel like it's enough to just say that God did this and God did that. I understand that to believers, that's just the way it is, however, it does not make sense to me that God, this intangible being, is believed by so many to be the reason behind our existence.

I don't believe that intelligent design should be taught in schools, and evolution replaced by it. Even more controversies would arise about this commonly debated topic, controversies that get us nowhere. I believe we should just accept what we has been taught in schools for a while now, science and evolution as the reason behind creation and existence, biodiversity and life. Facts, facts, facts. It's what we have and what we need in order to reach a rational conclusion about why we're here. "...most of us can agree on what we call a fact because we assume that it has been or can be verified by responsible observers." "We can agree on the reliability of such information because we trust the observers who report it." These are all quotes from the Claims of Fact packet, and they're discussing what facts are. Based on these quotes, we cannot say that the Bible is fact, because history proces that events int he Bible did not necessarily take place. Some religious texts were written years after supposed events occurred, and it's not like the life of Jesus was documented while he was living, meaning there would be room for mistake and inaccuracies. That being said, we then cannot say that, for example, the Book of Genesis containing God's creation on Day One and Two and so on, are fact!

SO then, how can we say that the world and everything in it, was created by God? How can you say that intelligent design is truly the reason for our existence? If something like this is so poorly backed with information and sound evidence, how can we possibley consider incorporating it into the curriculum of schools? It just doesn't seem like that would make society today any less chaotic, and there are still those who do not wish to be taught religion-based material. If intelligent design is taught in schools, then what's going to happen to the developed fields of science that the world has worked so many years in in order to find answers to our questions? Is it really worth it to discontinue and begin to place intelligent design on the same level as evolution, or possibly even take its place? Is it reasonable for us to deny all the discoveries and complex theories we have made thus far just so we could accept a simple theory as the basis of creation?

It's not.
I believe that science is the only way of proving our existence, and it should continue to be what is taught in schools.