Friday, March 14, 2008

The real problem with ID

I have been following the renewed ID/creationism/evolution "debate" with much interest, mostly so I can further educate myself about science and the fascinating array of knowledge and experience to be found in the natural world, but also to marvel at the colossal waste of time and energy expended in an ever-increasingly-desperate effort to keep evolution out of children's minds. The particulars of the "debate" have been discussed ad nauseam, but for me it really comes down to one, simple, painful conclusion.

Intelligent design is supremely, fantastically boring.

The basic premise seems to be this: This biological mechanism is so apparently complex that I cannot conceive of a natural means by which it may have evolved; therefore, an Intelligent Designer must have created it.

That's it. Whatever science has not yet been able to explain (and in most cases of supposed "irreducible complexity," already has explained) must be the work of some supernatural desginer. End of story. Go grab some chips & queso and see what's on TV.

Seriously, what's the point? How does this help anything?

No comments: