Coincidence? I Think Not:
Intelligent Design Should Have an Equal Platform in Science Classrooms “Do not indoctrinate your children [or yourself]. Teach them how to think for themselves, how to evaluate evidence, and how to disagree with you.” (Dawkins) Science, the study of all living things from an infinitesimal cell to the cosmos. One of a few fields that is run and fueled by questions of the unknown and debates among knowledgeable people. However, freedom is being stripped from science and in schools across the country. One is restricted to only asking questions and learning about Evolution but you cannot ask questions or learn about Intelligent Design (ID). If one was to even mention ID, in their scientific findings, they would be
…show more content…
Each of the little compartments contains machinery necessary to capture the energy of foodstuffs and store it in a chemically stable…form. The system uses a flow of acid to power its machines, which shuttles electrons.” (Behe) A man named Lynn Margulis said that at one time there was a cell with no mitochondria and one day a primordial cell happened to swallow a bacteria cell but did not digest it. Instead the cell had a symbiotic relationship with the bacterial cell and later accepted the new addition to its DNA. (Behe) In order to thoroughly understand the science, the definition of symbiosis is, “A close, prolonged association between two or more different organism of different species that may…benefit each member.” (Free Dictionary) Michael Behe states this about the evolution of the mitochondria, “can symbiosis explain the origin of complex biochemical systems? Clearly it cannot. The essence of symbiosis is the joining of two separate cells, or two separate systems, both of which are already functioning. In the mitochondrion scenario, one preexisting viable cell entered a symbiotic relationship with …show more content…
“In grammar school they taught me that a frog turning into a prince was a fairy tale. In the university they taught me that a frog turning into a prince was a fact!” (Carlson) The most widespread and decrepit part of Evolution is that human and apes derived from a common ancestor, yet, this is quite a stretch from a genetic perspective. Imagine a parent who has two offspring, the two offspring would have the same basic similarities as the parent and as their sibling. However, and the points below will harken to this fact, humans and apes to do not have any sibling-like similarity. A study done by Philip Lieberman has proven that even an evolutionary manipulated pharyngeal [voice box] region of a monkey or ape would not result in human sounds. The study was reported by Dr. Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist, who states, “Repeated attempts have been made to train nonhuman primates to mimic human speech sounds. Every endeavor has failed…Philip Lieberman concluded that ‘nonhuman primates lack a pharyngeal [voice box] region like man’s, where the cross-sectional area continually changes during speech.’… A research team headed by… biologist Tecumseh Fitch…noted…that [monkeys] lack a ‘speech ready brain’. Fitch and his team demonstrated that the brains and minds of nonhuman primates are almost totally lacking in their capacity to control…vocal tracts.
The two-hour special documentary, Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, features the Kitzmiller v. Dover School District case in 2004. It captures the turmoil that tore apart the community of Dover, Pennsylvania in one of the latest battles over teaching evolution in public schools. Some members of the community believed that not only Darwinism, but also a so called theory, Intelligent Design, should be taught in their public high school. It was a battle between the two theories. It forced neighbor against neighbor and friend against friend. The community itself was broken half and half on the controversial issue.
In chapter two of the book “Problems from Philosophy”, by James Rachels, the author guided us through the process in which the topic of God and the origin of the universe was discussed and argued. There were many arguments many arguments towards this topic from both a religious belivers view point, and a non-believer. The main points in this chapter were the arguments, like the argument from design, the best-explanation argument, the same-evidence argument, the theory of Natural selection, and the first cause argument.
After reviewing the film Expelled no intelligence allowed I was taken back by the whole idea of people being terminated from their jobs for mentioning intelligent design. When Ben Stein would question people about the subject of intelligent design they would say they are no such thing and reply with if people want to educate their children they will not mention this again. They would reply it is nothing but a waste of time and energy. It was like they were pushing God away from the subject as well as the schools. This to me is so very wrong. I do not agree with it nor understand why people are acting this way toward the subject in a public settings when there is supposed to be free speech and free will, but this film has proved otherwise. It not only proved it, but it showed how people who do speak their minds are being treated after they do, and it is not fair nor is it right.
In the film Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, a small, rural town in Dover, Pennsylvania is being analyzed for its Kitzmiller vs. Dover court case. Dover is a school district in Pennsylvania whose school board argued that their students should be aware of Intelligent Design as an alternative to teaching Darwinism. There are several arguments being discussed throughout this documentary. The most expressed argument is whether not Intelligent Design should be taught in schools. Some other prevailing arguments are the belief that Intelligent Design and creationism are the same thing, the argument that evolution is neutral to religion, and the argument that evolution should not be questioned no matter what. Questions such as these captivate the mind and makes people wonder what the real truth is.
Thesis: It is patently absurd to argue that creationism and / or intelligent design deserve a place in public school textbooks in the "science" chapter or in any way near to the chapter on evolution. The United States Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and freedom of expression, so all faiths and denominations have the absolute right to worship and believe as they
Case law supporting the absence of the instruction of intelligent design theory from secular, public education cites several main grounds for exclusion, including the unconstitutionality of ?sponsorship, financial support, and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity? [397 U.S. 664].
Mitochondria are small organelles found in eukaryotic cells which respire aerobically. They are responsible for generating energy from food to ‘power the cell’. They contain their own DNA, reproducing by dividing in 2. As they closely resemble bacteria, it gave the idea that they were derived from bacteria (which were engulfed by ancestors of the eukaryotes we know today). This idea has since been confirmed from further investigations, and it is now widely accepted. (Alberts et al., 2010a)
The study of science is defined as that which deals with the workings of the physical world we are able to observe and measure. The origin of life, however, is a topic that science has long grappled with, despite the impossibility of observing or proving any origins theory in a strictly scientific manner. Today, the widely accepted theory of life’s beginning is the theory of Evolution by mutation and natural selection, or Neo-Darwinism. Most people in our modern society accept this theory at face value because it is popular with the majority of scientists, but it must always be taken into account that our origins cannot be proven scientifically and that, in fact, the theory of Evolution is not the only or even the most logical theory
The argument has been going on for years and years. Should schools be allowed to teach evolution without teaching creationism? The courts have ruled, the answer is no, the theory of creationism cannot be included in a public school’s academic curriculum. With the court’s decision, it has been made clear there is no place for faith based theories to be taught in our public schools. What if there was a different approach that took God out of the equation? Public high schools should allow a course in intelligent design to be included in the curriculum as a way of teaching both evolution and creationism without violating the separation of church and state. This is certainly easier said than done.
The Dover Area School Board passed a resolution offering Intelligent Design as an alternative theory to Darwin’s theory of evolution in public school. Tammy Kitzmiller sued the Dover school board in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The federal question brought to the court by the plaintiff was whether Intelligent Design was an offshoot policy of creationism. Moreover, does Intelligent Design constitute an establishment of religion, prohibited by the First Amendment, made applicable by the Fourteenth Amendment? Judge Jones presided over the case and held that Intelligent Design was not science, but religion. The Judge also ruled that the Dover School Board violated the Establishment Clause by implementing religion in public
Intelligent design supporters have believed that a low-key approach is in order to be more successful ,rather than simply asking educational institutions to require that intelligent design be taught. Instead, they ask only that schools teach the controversy surrounding evolution, arguing that broadening the discussion will foster critical thought. (Clemmitt, 2005)
Despite great efforts to convince the opposing side, a battle still brews amongst creationists and evolutionists over the beginning of life and the universe, but neither opinions’ palpability can be firmly upheld through scientific manners. Since science can only prove hypotheses that are testable and based on current observations, neither creation nor evolutionary concepts can be proven with irrefutable evidence. However, regardless of the inability to prove either concept, most public school systems promote evolution as a scientific fact. Many students who lack firm beliefs about the origin of life believe what they are taught without giving any personal thought to the matter. Instead of robotically absorbing biased information,
Teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design to our youth can be done in a way that is neither opinion based nor completely fact based, but may hold some risk of personal interpretation. The first thing needed to be considered is how can children of the middle school age range grasp such a deep subject and have the capacity to reach their own conclusion. Information found regarding the development of children in this developmental range was found in the book titled "Characteristics of Middle Grade Students,” Caught in the Middle by the Sacramento Department of Education. It was found that students of this age hold a variety of learning attributes that support the belief that children can handle both sides of this controversial issue. Some
Public schools are a place to learn proven facts and some very well—known and accepted theories. These schools have been led this way for a long time and show no signs of changing. Many states around the country have rejected the teaching of creationism in public schools, since the subject is so controversial among teachers and parents. In Ohio, a bill to develop new science content standards was not successfully passed. Many creationists were upset when they discovered that the first drafts of the standards were filled with evolutionary content, without any allowance for alternative explanations of life’s origins. In the uproar, the state board held a special meeting to investigate the process that the writing team and advisory committee used to draft the science standards (Matthews, Answering Genesis). This is why learning the facts about evolution should be taught at school. By doing this, there would be much less confrontation between teachers, students, and parents. If one has the desire to learn about creationism or any other beliefs of how the world came to be, one should learn it at a place outside of school, such as church or at home.
Genetic engineering is the process whereby new DNA is added or existing DNA is altered in an organism 's genome. This may involve changing one base pair (A-T or C-G) or deleting entire sections of DNA or adding additional copies of a gene. This results in creating new traits that were not previously present in the organism’s genome. This is done to selectively breed desired traits or to create plants with increased resistance to pesticides and increased tolerance to herbicides. For example insulin is a protein that regulates sugar content in our blood and is produced normally in the pancreas. Genetic engineering is used to produce a form of insulin that is similar to yeast and bacterial cells. This genetically engineered insulin is called