Vatican: ‘ID’ not science

Vatican paper says ‘intelligent design’ not science

The Vatican newspaper has published an article saying “intelligent design” is not science and that teaching it alongside evolutionary theory in school classrooms only creates confusion.The article in Tuesday’s editions of L’Osservatore Romano was the latest in a series of interventions by Vatican officials — including the pope — on the issue that has dominated headlines in the United States.

The author, Fiorenzo Facchini, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Bologna, laid out the scientific rationale for Darwin’s theory of evolution, saying that in the scientific world, biological evolution “represents the interpretative key of the history of life on Earth.”

He lamented that certain American “creationists” had brought the debate back to the “dogmatic” 1800s, and said their arguments weren’t science but ideology.

“This isn’t how science is done,” he wrote. “If the model proposed by Darwin is deemed insufficient, one should look for another, but it’s not correct from a methodological point of view to take oneself away from the scientific field pretending to do science.”

In ongoing debates with Creationists, it’s important to note that most Christians accept science as such.

Comments

  1. lometa wrote:

    As a Xian and a biologist I would have to disagree with the American Creationists who make the claim that “most of American Christians” believe in the ideology of Intelligent Design as they insist upon defining it. Since Catholics comprise 24% of the US Christian community (The World Factbook), the American Creationists would do well to take a good look at their very numerous Catholic counterparts and what the officials of their church are saying. Facchini is correct when he suggest, “If the model proposed by Darwin is deemed insufficient, one should look for another.”

    As a Christian parent I do not want my children indoctrinated with what the state government mandates that they learn about Intelligent Design in a public schools.

    Posted 19 Jan 2006 at 4:38 pm

  2. jpm100 wrote:

    I almost have to believe that the Republican leadership and some Pundits purposefully pick Christian issues that will fail to be implimented. They get to look pro-Christian, but leave no bitter anti-Christian aftertaste.

    Posted 19 Jan 2006 at 11:56 pm

  3. M. Murcek wrote:

    Anyone with a lick of intelligence knows that ID is stupid, and worse, it’s the wrong fight. The real fight is to get the government out of the education business.

    Posted 20 Jan 2006 at 11:04 am

  4. KenWheaton wrote:

    M. Murcek,
    It isn’t “the government” trying to put ID in the classroom, it’s typically the community–unless we want to start classifying local school boards (made up of parents) as “the government.”

    Repeated moves by Creationists is one reason that, despite being a Republican, I think the government has to remain involved.

    A broad-based public education with common elements helps this country more than it hurts it. Take the government out, then you have many more “private” schools–which aren’t necessarily bad, but you can imagine what would happen if Christian schools and Muslim schools and Jewish schools suddenly became the predominant method of education in this country. A Million Little Madrasas is not something we need.

    Posted 20 Jan 2006 at 11:11 am

  5. M. Murcek wrote:

    Ken
    The idealized version of universal public education you present would be a wonderful thing. The collectivized, mediocre mess we are actually getting is something else entirely. Only when schools are run for the benefit of the students, instead of for the benefit of the teachers’ unions and their democrat party clients / enablers will we get anywhere. You can’t look at the studies of how poorly the average public school student stacks up against students from other modern countries and be a serious apologist for what we have now.
    Peter Drucker said (and I paraphrase as best I can recall it) “an institution or business fails as soon as you graft a purpose onto it that distracts from it’s primary mission” Our schools are supposed to teach kids to read, write and do math, not to be a placeholder against competing socialization models.

    Posted 20 Jan 2006 at 12:07 pm

« We must be losing
Venom-watch: Moonbats force Post to shutter blog »