As a result of this, the Intelligent Design movement relies on a lot of misinformation about evolution in order to defeat it. They may emphasize that evolution is only a "theory", trying to imply that it isn't justified by any evidence, when in a scientific context the word "theory" implicitly implies that the idea has much evidence on its side and contains multitudes of facts that fit its framework. They also tend to point out areas that evolution has not been fully explained at the moment, saying this is evidence for design. However, every scientific theory has unexplained areas, and we can't expect theories to fill every hole. This is a reflection of our epistemic limitations as human beings, not a reflection of the validity of evolution! The fact that evolution does not explain everything is not a criticism, nor does this wipe away the wide array of facts it DOES explain. Furthermore, an unexplained observation is not a falsification of the theory. Potentially, an unexplained phenomenon could one day be shown to falsify the theory--but merely pointing out our ignorance of the explanation does not falsify anything. It is just as possible that it could fit the framework.
As a supporter of the Intelligent Design movement, you should definitely study scientific methodology to learn why your position is not even remotely scientific. On a philosophical level, as well, your position is highly untenable. The teleological argument (which is what Intelligent Design is based upon) runs thus:
1. Complex, purposeful structures show evidence of intelligent design. 2. Biological structures are complex and purposeful. 3. Therefore, biological structures were intelligently designed.
Now, the argument does indeed follow, but what of the designer? Is not the designer complex and purposeful? The designer of such structures would necessarily be complex and purposeful. Therefore, following the premises of the argument:
1. Complex and purposeful things were intelligently designed. 2. The designer implied by the teleological argument is complex and purposeful. 3. Therefore, the designer was intelligently designed.
This creates an infinite regress of designers. The regress cannot be stopped unless one denies the very premises of the argument. Therefore, the idea is incompatible with monotheism, and anyone who thinks it justifies an inference of a single all-powerful God is fooling himself.
In short, Intelligent Design is neither scientifically nor philosophically tenable. It makes no specific predictions and relies wholly on criticizing the "holes" in evolution--despite the fact that all theories have "holes" in knowledge and these gaps do not falsify the theory, nor do these gaps wipe away the abundant evidence in favor of evolution. I highly recommend that you read about all the evidence in favor of evolution. When you realize how many facts in all kinds of different biological fields fit the evolutionary framework, you will realize how truly magnificent and wonderful the theory really is.
However, you can find solace in the fact that you are not a creationist. Your arguments are a little more intelligent, sophisticated, and cunning than the average creationist, even though they are, in the long run, just as flawed.
If you feel that gaps in the fossil record or the second law of thermodynamics contradicts evolution, please click here, as these arguments are addressed and assessed there and shown to be lacking.
The other possible categories:
In case you're interested, and you're probably not, you may want to check out my blog for more assaults on religious silliness and defenses of science and right thinking. Here it is, silly gooses: Saint Gasoline
(And yes, I know that the plural of goose is geese. I just like to fuck the system.)
More tests we think you'll like
Taken 132 times.
Find out if you can survive when the zombies attack.
Taken 50 times.
A test to determine your character's alignment in the city of Asai'lum.
Taken 3832 times.
How much U.S. History do you really know? Do you remember the things your teachers taught you? Do you pay attention when reading newspapers or watching the news?
Taken 2255 times.
Are you sociopathic? Take the test.
Taken 895 times.
Do you have aptitude for Candor, Erudite, Dauntless, Abnegation, or Amity?
Taken 196 times.
Hey internet fiends! Hopefully, most people taking this test are familiar with the popular online comic Bob and George, if not, check it out at http:...
Taken 24976 times.
Hi! And welcome to my Humane Sexuality Test. I'll be using advanced theory and research to determine how sexually open, educated and just plain weird ...
Taken 230 times.
Find out which Strawhat Pirate you are, anyone from Luffy to Brooke
Taken 2691 times.
My brain works in such a "special" way that my friends have named my way of thinking as 'Twisted Roger Logic'. This basically involves making very ast...
Taken 275 times.