Re: "We should teach the argument" when it comes to intelligent design (a term he describes as "creationism, pure and simple").

The argument is simple: ID claims that one or more designer(s) are responsible for life as we know it. So let's teach the controversy shall we:

Richard B Hoppe showed how the evidence supports his multiple designers theory (MDT) (http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2004/09/introduction_to.html)

Perhaps it's time to teach the controversy and show that there are multiple designers involved in the evolution of life?

Of course the controversy is simple: it's not a scientific controversy but one regarding faith. Do you really want to have public schools teach about religion?

Explain your answers,

Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
 And while he describes himself as a Darwinist and an "orthodox Freudian," Mr. [Christopher] Hitchens thinks the president is right that "we should teach the argument" when it comes to intelligent design (a term he describes as "creationism, pure and simple").

 
Received on Thu Jun 1 11:55:06 2006