Changes

Intelligent Design is the theory that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, rather than natural processes, such as proscribe by the [[Theory of evolution]][http://www.discovery.org/csc/topQuestions.php]. Many design theorists leave the identity of the intelligent cause open.[http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1341]. Many proponents, however, admit to believe the intelligent cause to be [[God]].  

Intelligent Design is the theory that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, rather than natural processes, such as proscribed by the [[Theory of evolution]][http://www.discovery.org/csc/topQuestions.php]. Many design theorists leave the identity of the intelligent cause open.[http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1341]. Some proponents, however, admit to believe the intelligent cause to be [[God]].  

Recently, there has been articles which were favorable to the intelligent design position in scientific journals which traditionally have favored the macroevolutionary position. [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640]

Recently, there have been articles which were favorable to the intelligent design position in scientific journals which traditionally have favored the macroevolutionary position. [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640]

Design theory enjoys a small amount of stated support within the worldwide scientific community (creationist scientists report there is widespread discriminatory action against creationist scientists[http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v9/i2/suppression.asp]), but it is steadily growing. From 2001 to 2007 over 700 scientists had signed the pro-Intelligent Design manifesto ''A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism'' published by the leaders of the design movement, the Discovery Institute. [http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/] This has caused some scientists to question the claim of the dominant scientific community that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of life and call for public school science students to study the evidence supporting it in greater detail.  

Design theory enjoys a small amount of stated support within the worldwide scientific community (creationist scientists report there is widespread discriminatory action against creationist scientists[http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v9/i2/suppression.asp]). From 2001 to 2007, over 700 scientists had signed the pro-Intelligent Design manifesto, ''A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism'', published by the leaders of the design movement, the Discovery Institute. [http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/] This has caused some scientists to question the claim of the dominant scientific community that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of life and call for public school science students to study the evidence supporting it in greater detail.  

In a recent trial in Dover, Pennsylvania Judge John E. Jones III ruled that Intelligent Design was not valid science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents".  However, the WorldNetDaily stated: "A historic judicial ruling against intelligent design theory hailed as a "broad, stinging rebuke" and a "masterpiece of wit, scholarship and clear thinking" actually was "cut and pasted" from a brief by [[ACLU]] lawyers and includes many of their provable errors, contends the Seattle-based Discovery Institute." [http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53330] This information was originally published in a press release from the [[Discovery Institute]]. Critics contend that it is a misrepresentation of legal precedent and that the ruling followed standard procedure. [http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/12/casey_luskinnot.html]

In a recent trial in Dover, Pennsylvania Judge John E. Jones III ruled that Intelligent Design was not valid science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents".  However, the WorldNetDaily stated: "A historic judicial ruling against intelligent design theory hailed as a "broad, stinging rebuke" and a "masterpiece of wit, scholarship and clear thinking" actually was "cut and pasted" from a brief by [[ACLU]] lawyers and includes many of their provable errors, contends the Seattle-based Discovery Institute." [http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53330] This information was originally published in a press release from the [[Discovery Institute]]. Critics contend that it is a misrepresentation of legal precedent and that the ruling followed standard procedure. [http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/12/casey_luskinnot.html]

== Analogies ==

== Analogies ==

Many Intelligent Design advocates propose the "watch" analogy.  Imagine you are walking along a beach, and you suddenly encounter a wrist-watch.  Given its relative sophistication vis-a-vis its environment, and the obvious non-random care with which it was made, does the wrist-watch pre-suppose an Intelligent Designer? Evolutionary thinkers would have us believe that humans (the wrist-watch) just evolved there, on the beach, whereas Intelligent Design advocates properly realize that the watch (us, ourselves) was simply created, by God. 

Many Intelligent Design advocates propose the "watch" analogy.  Imagine one is walking along a beach, and suddenly encounters a wrist-watch.  Given its relative sophistication vis-a-vis its environment, and the obvious non-random care with which it was made, does the wrist-watch pre-suppose an Intelligent Designer?