The Evolution of Creationism

HT to Panda’s Thumb for alerting me to a recent video produced by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) which summarizes their findings regarding the high school biology textbook Of Pandas and People. NCSE’s research uncovers proof that this particular textbook was edited heavily (and just a little sloppily) in order to bypass the 1987 Supreme Court decision (Edwards v. Aguillard) that declared the unconstitutionality of teaching of creationism in public schools. If you think it’s inconceivable that “intelligent design” equals “creationism,” I don’t think that word means what you think it means.

View the evidence for yourself:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUB8Mv1SaKQ]

6 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

6 Responses to The Evolution of Creationism

  1. cdesign proponentsists … made me laugh out loud.

  2. Cliff,

    That’s called getting caught with your zipper undone. 😉

  3. It is true that a good number of ID proponents are creationists that are trying to use ID to prop up creationism. But the concept of ID (right or wrong) is different from creationism. I dont undrestand why the ID=Creationism shippers are only interested in the motivations and personalities and not IDEAS. The concept of ID stands distinct from the people who promote it. Even if all IDers are closet YECers trying to sneak their ideas into the classroom (like the Cdesign proponentsISTS), this says nothing about ID as theory.

    As for me, I’m a Christian who fell for YEC when I first came across it, but later I shifted to TE because of the glaring scientific errors in YEC. However I still had the feeling that many of the objections to evolution brought out by creationists were still valid. But after reading about ID the scales fell from my eyes and I’m now an ID proponent. Behe and Dembski say it like it is. All te scientific evidence points to ID and common descent-atleast upto the level of phyla. I’m not sure about universal common descent

  4. Jesrael,

    Thanks for posting!

    the concept of ID (right or wrong) is different from creationism.

    I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to say here. Can you elaborate?

    The concept of ID stands distinct from the people who promote it. Even if all IDers are closet YECers trying to sneak their ideas into the classroom (like the Cdesign proponentsISTS), this says nothing about ID as theory.

    The problem with this statement is that ID is not a theory. It’s a philosophical presupposition. If you look at the comments section of my review of Ben Stein’s Expelled, even Dr. Bohlin admits that his Discovery Institute has produced nothing of scientific import. Why? Because the organization does not provide nor pursue testable theories. It merely attempts to find the proverbial “Made by God” label on each cell.

    … later I shifted to TE because of the glaring scientific errors in YEC. However I still had the feeling that many of the objections to evolution brought out by creationists were still valid.

    How long ago was this shift? I’m curious because the most genetic evidence for human evolution has only come to light within the last decade. Also, what creationist arguments do you still find valid?

  5. Creation science might agree with the tenets of ID, but simply because there is agreement in areas doesn’t mean the 2 concepts are interchangeable. There are many aspects of creation science to which ID does not ascribe:

    *Sudden creation, out of nothing
    *Separate ancestry of different animals
    *Global flood geological perspective
    *Young earth
    *Supernatural creator
    *Accuracy of the Genesis account

  6. Inkling,

    You're absolutely correct that Creation Science and Intelligent Design are not interchangeable terms. However, the evidence provided in the video reveals that these particular proponents of Intelligent Design involved in publishing this textbook view their paradigm as a form of Special Creationism, i.e., that all of earth's life forms could not have evolved via purely natural laws established at the beginning of time by the Creator, thus requiring periodic divine intervention in order to achieve evolutionary change.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *