Hooray!

"The problem comes about when you realize that both options, Evolution and Creationism, are completely unprovable without dying, and even then you can't communicate your results back. In essence they both require the same amount of faith, and it boils down to what you believe in."

The above comment speaks as if Evolution is some sort theory about the after life. Evolution is a theory that simply states organisms over many generations change as they adapt to thier environment. The changes come about through two mechanisms:

Random Mutation

Natural Selection

New physical features can apear through mutation (bigger brain, longer fingers, etc.) that might make an organism more successfull at survivfing and reproducing than other organisms of the same species without the mutation.

I don't see how the poster can confuse this theory with the existance of an after life.

Perhaps the poster thinks that the existance of god and the after life voids the theroy of evolution.

It is perfectly reasonable to see evolution and the existance of god as compatible: God created evolution because it allows his creatures to adapt to new environments.

You don't have to have one or the other.

But one thing is very clear, Intelligent Design is a repackaged version of creationism that makes a mockery of the scientific method. The sientific method by the way is responsibble for our high standard of living.

If you must have creationism at the expense of the scientific method, be prepared to lead a tough, hard life without all the technological comforts that we have recieved through the rigourous application and funding of the scientific method in the United States over the last century.

If you read this BBC story, it seems like there's more science to Evolution. Woolly Mammoths certainly aren't the only animals to have been genome sequenced. Humans, monkeys, mice, dogs, wolves ... the list of creatures goes on. Analysis of those genetic sequences provide very telling evidence of the evolutionary process.

Perhaps what's needed is clarification. Are Intelligent Design folks pushing their theory to explain the ORIGIN of life or to explain the DEVELOPMENT of life over time? For the first, sure, both are currently unprovable theories. For the latter, it seems quite obvious that evolution is a TRUE theory.

The material above, is my objective take. Here's my subjective take. An Origin Of Species was not written to explain the beginning of life. Rather, it was written to show how modern species that did not exist in earlier eras may have come to exist in modern times through a process. Does that necessarily deny that some God may have created life? No. Does it deny Genesis that God made man in his image? Yes. Is that where the problem comes from - I would say yes, because otherwise, there is no conflict between religion and evolution. Boil away the politics and how many different religious sects are arguing for the inclusion of their Intelligent Design theory into curriculum? Hmmm, most if not all are Christians. Why is this becoming political? Because despite America promoting itself as secular, the voting base is largely religious and incumbants know that to retain office, they must retain the popular vote.

Should Intelligent Design be taught in schools? It has a place in social studies. It has a place in history class. It has a place in geography/anthropology. It has a place in philosophy. It does NOT have a place in science class. Just as you do not teach computer science language lexical analysis in English grammar classes - they can certainly be related, but not relevant.