ID-proponents and public imagination against Science

The theory of evolution has overwhelming scientific support and it's standard and basic of all biological sciences (Palaeontology, Genetics, Zoology, Molecular Biology and other fields). There are no "major gaps" in the theory of evolution and fact is that Darwinism is accepted by every serious biologist in the world.

Opponents of evolution want to make a place for ID by spreading confusion and by creating a widespread impression that the scientific consensus has a doubtful foundation. Paul over at NYT.com did a wonderful job cutting through the confusion and getting into the heart of matter (via via). There's no controversy about the validity of evolutionary theory – it’s all about religion and public imagination.

Scientific truth is determined by peer review, not public opinion and in The Seattle Times there’s an editorial called The philosophy of intelligent design where the difference is explained:

A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable to fail. The theory of evolution, for example, postulates complex life arising from simple life. If the geological record showed otherwise — that the further one went back, the more complex life was, or that unrelated species repeatedly appeared as if from nowhere — that would falsify the theory.

Intelligent design implies that God did it. That may be true. Certainly, millions of Americans believe so. But intelligent design is not a scientific theory because there is no set of facts that would disprove it. No matter what science says tomorrow, a believer in intelligent design could say, "Yes, that's the way God did it."

If someone wants to change the theory of evolution they need to come up with some hard Science to prove it. They can't because their arguments don't hold up.

Presidential science adviser John H. Marburg III, who told The New York Times that intelligent design "is not a scientific concept," said Bush believes it should be discussed as part of the "social context" in science classes.

Teaching ID theory in classroom will introduce some kind of laissez-faire amongst students and it will undermine real Science. Students will not need any efforts to understand Science, they can just point to ID and say "Well, the Creator did it – I don't need to understand it", when something becomes to complicated.

It's shocking too that ID is already being taught in classroom and accepted as a possible explanation of human existence and some school board has already revised its science curriculum to allow the teaching of creationism.

If the White House will spread this to the entire world, then we need not worry about terrorist bombs - we will have "intelligent design" to take us back to Stone Age. And that would be a quite foolish thing to do.