Difference between revisions of "Intelligent design/objections"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Evolution vs. Intelligent Design moved to User:Woozle/Evolution vs. Intelligent Design) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | [[Category:Issues]][[Intelligent Design]] (ID) is often proposed as a viable alternative to the theory of [[Evolution]]. Mainstream scientists generally agree that ID is not a viable theory, but the challenges continue – and many of the arguments advanced by the ID camp are appealing and quite difficult to refute. | |
| − | + | ==Notes== | |
| + | The OSC analysis linked below seems a pretty reasonable treatment of a solution, but it remains to be seen whether it will be accepted by the vast majority of those supporting ID. | ||
| + | ==Related Articles== | ||
| + | * [[Creation]] | ||
| + | ** [[Evolution]] | ||
| + | ** [[Intelligent Design]] | ||
| + | ==Analyses== | ||
| + | * [[User:Woozle/Evolution vs. Intelligent Design|a biased analysis]] by Woozle | ||
| + | * [http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/story.html?id=1142 Creation and Evolution in the Schools] by [[Orson Scott Card]] (2006-01-12) | ||
Revision as of 12:41, 21 January 2006
Intelligent Design (ID) is often proposed as a viable alternative to the theory of Evolution. Mainstream scientists generally agree that ID is not a viable theory, but the challenges continue – and many of the arguments advanced by the ID camp are appealing and quite difficult to refute.
Notes
The OSC analysis linked below seems a pretty reasonable treatment of a solution, but it remains to be seen whether it will be accepted by the vast majority of those supporting ID.
Related Articles
Analyses
- a biased analysis by Woozle
- Creation and Evolution in the Schools by Orson Scott Card (2006-01-12)