It looks like I am going to have to do some myth busting again. Even my favorite radio talk show host, Bob Lonsberry, got this one wrong. However, this isn’t to say I know or understand what Christ Buttars means by “divine design” either. But if Buttars’ divine design is similar to intelligent design, then I think that some consideration needs to be given to his proposal.
Intelligent design is NOT creationism. It is NOT Catholicism. It is NOT Protestantism, or Buddhism, or Judaism, or even Mormonism. Further, It is not a politically correct term for religious belief in the creation. In fact, it is really something completely different than what many people believe it to be.
The Intelligent Design Network provides a good definition of intelligent design: “Intelligent design is … a scientific disagreement with the core claim of evolutionary theory that the apparent design of living systems is an illusion. In a broader sense, intelligent design is simply the science of design detection — how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose.” If you prefer a less biased source for your information on intelligent design, than I refer you to Wikipedia.
Intelligent design is based on the same scientific principles as the theory of evolution. To be what it claims to be it would have to be. They use the scientific method to show that the development of the earth had to be done by some intelligence.
They don’t say who (or what) this intelligence is. In fact they avoid any discussion of deity. They wouldn’t be opposed to the intelligent designer being a more capable alien race, or even flying spaghetti monster.
I am not some intelligent design fanatic. I am just simply saying that if this is being put to us to make a decision on whether this is taught in our schools, we NEED to understand what it is. And simply put, it is just another scientific theory. So, why not teach it in our school?
UPDATE (17 Aug 2005): Jeff Lindsay offers an interesting parody of the intellegent design vs. evolution debate.