Evolution vs. intelligent design: No factual basis

Photo of author
Written By Samuel L. Blumenfeld

Back in 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a 1981 Louisiana law which mandated a balanced treatment in teaching evolution and creation in the public schools. The Court decided that the intent of the law “was clearly to advance the religious viewpoint that a supernatural being created humankind,” and therefore violated the First Amendment’s prohibition on a government establishment of religion. In other words, the Court adopted the atheist position that creation is a religious myth.

In speaking for the majority, Justice William J. Brennan wrote: “The legislative history documents that the act’s primary purpose was to change the science curriculum of public schools in order to provide an advantage to a particular religious doctrine that rejects the factual basis of evolution in its entirety.”

Of course, no one bothered to remind the learned Justice that some of the world’s greatest scientists were and are devout Christians and, that it is atheism which is destroying true science, not religion. Also, Justice Brennan seemed to be totally unaware that an “establishment of religion” meant a state-sanctioned church, such as they have in England with the Anglican Church, which is the official Church of England. Belief in God is not an establishment of religion. Belief in a supernatural being who created mankind is not an establishment of religion.

Also, there is no factual basis to evolution. The fossil record shows no intermediary forms of species development. No scientist has been able to mate a monkey and a human being and get something in between.

But home-schoolers, although not affected by what the Court forces on government schools, should know how to refute the Fairy Tale called the Theory of Evolution. Justice Brennan called it fact, which simply indicates the depth of his ignorance.

First, what exactly is the Theory of Evolution? For the answer, we must go to the source: Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, published in 1859. Darwin claimed that the thousands of different species of animals, insects, and plants that exist on earth were not the works of a Divine Creator who made each specie in its present immutable form, as described in Genesis, but are the products of a very long natural process of development from simpler organic forms to more complex organisms.

Thus, according to Darwin, species continue to change or “evolve,” through a process of natural selection in which nature’s harsh conditions permit only the fittest to survive in more adaptable forms. But a funny thing happened on the way to the 20th century. The elite fittest are not having enough children to see that their tribe increases, while the so-called unfittest all over the globe are having kids like crazy.

Darwin also believed that all life originated from a single source—a kind of primeval slime in which the first living organisms formed spontaneously out of non-living matter through a random process—by accident.

The first false idea in the theory is that non-organic matter can transform itself into organic matter. Pasteur proved that this was impossible. Second, the enormous complexity of organic matter precludes accidental creation. There had to be a designer. There is now a whole scientific school devoted to the design theory. William A. Dembski’s book, Intelligent Design, published in 1999, is the pioneering work that bridges science with theology. Dembski writes:

“Intelligent design is three things: a scientific research program that investigates the effects of intelligent causes; an intellectual movement that challenges Darwinism and its naturalistic legacy; and a way of understanding divine action….It was Darwin’s expulsion of design from biology that made possible the triumph of naturalism in Western culture. So, too, it will be intelligent design’s restatement of design within biology that will be the undoing of naturalism in Western culture.”

Dembski proves that design is “empirically detectable,” because we can observe it all around us. The birth of a child is a miracle of design. The habits of your household cat is a miracle of design. All cats do the same things. These are the inherited characteristics of the species. The idea that accident could create such complex behavior passed on to successive generations simply doesn’t make sense. The complexity of design proves the existence of God. Dembski writes:

“Indeed within theism divine action is the most basic mode of causation since any other mode of causation involves creatures which themselves were created in a divine act. Intelligent design thus becomes a unifying framework for understanding both divine and human agency and illuminates several long-standing philosophical problems about the nature of reality and our knowledge of it.”

Intelligent design is certainly proven by the fact that every living organism lives through a programmed cycle of birth, growth, and finally death. That very specific program is contained in the tiniest embryo at the time of conception. The embryo of a cow probably does not look any different from the embryo of a human being. But each has been programmed differently: one creates a cow, the other a human being. In the case of the latter, that tiny embryo contains an incredibly complex biological program that causes the individual to be born, pass through infancy and childhood, develop into maturity, middle-age, old age, and finally death, a process that takes sometimes as much as a hundred years. How can an accident plan what is going to happen 100 years after it has happened?

But since intelligent design infers the existence of a designer—God—it is likely that evolutionists will resist any change in their views, since the acknowledgment of the existence of God is too nightmarish for them to contemplate.

1 thought on “Evolution vs. intelligent design: No factual basis”

  1. This article is simply stupid…

    First of all, teaching children about completely unproven bs that comes from religious beliefs is establishment of religion. People that believe in these teachings for children should opt for seminary school, or another form of non-academic education, since academic education implies learning fact and not myth.
    Secondly, stating that intelligent design is proven since living beings function properly ” In­tel­li­gent de­sign is cer­tainly proven by the fact that every liv­ing or­gan­ism lives through a pro­grammed cy­cle of birth, growth, and fi­nally death” is like saying that magic is proven because planes can fly without any physical object between them and the ground.
    Saying that evolution is not proven since nobody could mate a monkey and a human and get something in between is completely stupid. According to that logic, if you were to have a child with your grandmother, it would be your mother, which is completely stupid, and clearly incorrect.
    Also, your lack of knowledge regarding evolution is scary, and it clearly demonstrates everything that is wrong with the world, with people commenting on things that they clearly know nothing about.

    The collection of fossils clearly shows a progression of living organisms and the the evolutionary path. If the theory of intelligent design were to be true, then there would records of current species in fossils from every single time period we could think of, since everything was just created out of nowhere, however, this is evidently not the case, since almost all the species of animals, plants and fungi didn’t exist say 150million years ago.

    Also, justifying your entire belief system on a book that has an unknown origin and author is completely ludicrous, since any high lunatic can write a book saying whatever they please, without any reality or any connection to the real world.
    Finally, I would like for you and your followers to consider the actual advantage of having a “God”. If this god is in fact as benevolent and omnipotent as you suggest, it makes absolutely no sense that things such as cancer exist. Somethings happen as a result of things that go beyond decisions by individuals or organisms. If your god was as good as you say, how in the world do you explain the occurrence of cancer in children, since it happens without any input from everything. If god created a world with infantile cancer, then there is absolutely no way that god is as good a being as suggested.

    Believing in something that has no proof (actually has proof to contradict it) and choosing to ignore proven fact is ok, since it is your life and you do whatever the hell you want with it, but suggesting that others should abide to your stupidity, and questioning and even condemning those that dont abide to your lifestyle that preaches the belief in myth is simply disrespectful, stupid and ridiculous, and I hope that any that see this will see how it is people like you that slow down those that are actually contributing to the world and trying to understand it and improve it


Leave a Comment