Intelligent Design is usually considered as a stealth creationism in 
part because of the historical development of its present form and 
secondarily because it seems to come down (from ID statements) that the 
designer is either God or aliens (and the historical background makes 
clear which is to be considered the designer; however, that can't be 
said to the general public because it puts it clearly into the realm of 
religion rather than science).

That, in part, though, is beside the point. The main point is that ID 
hasn't been able to come up with a rational method to test the "theory". 
In essence, the "evidence", such as examples of "irreducible 
complexity", is entirely subjective. When such an example is shown to be 
false, all the IDer needs to do is bring up another supposedly 
irreducibly complex example, and so on ad infinitum. The so-called 
mathematical "proofs" depend on the assumptions plugged into them, and 
those assumptions are not defendible scientifically.

That "God did it" is outside the realm of science, which can treat only 
the material universe of matter and energy. In philosophical theory, the 
proposition that God created as per the Bible (or any of the other 
origination stories) is possible; but it's not something testible by 
science.

Cheers,

Art Harris

Laboratory for Environmental Biology, Centennial Museum
University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX  79968-0915
[log in to unmask]   http://museum.utep.edu/
http://museum.utep.edu/chih/chihdes.htm

Eric Johnson wrote:
> Thanks for your thoughtful response, George--I agree that this 
> discussion very much has a place in the museum world and hence on this 
> list.
> 
> As an aside, I have often wondered in the course of this debate whether 
> it is reasonable to glibly (for want of a better word) conflate ID and 
> creationism.  At least some proponents of ID claim that they are two 
> different things, and while I recognize that there is a possibility (a 
> probability?) that some of them could be merely trying to obfuscate 
> their real agenda in support of creationism, it seems to me that there 
> may yet be room to take them at their word.  Are creationism and 
> evolution the only allowable alternatives in the debate?
> 
> Or is there room for a serious scientific study of the possibility of 
> intelligent design in nature?  Is ID that study?  If it isn't (because 
> it is flawed in some form), should others--"hard" scientists, 
> perhaps--take up the banner?
> 
> It simply seems to me that "creationism"--like "evangelical" and 
> "liberal"--is a term that has been so larded with preconception that 
> opponents of ID feel they can simply lump ID in with creationism and 
> dismiss the whole.  Which does a disservice, in my opinion, to 
> interested laypersons such as myself who would like to see an open 
> discussion of all these questions--in museum, in scientific literature, 
> and in the popular media.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --Eric
> 
> Eric D. M. Johnson
> Proprietor
> The Village Factsmith Historical Research & Consulting
> http://www.factsmith.com/
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Garner" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 12:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [MUSEUM-L] For those interested in evolution AND 
> Intelligent Design . . .
> 
> 
>> With all due respect, Stefanie, the websites you posted point to the very
>> heart of this discussion and precisely why it is relevant to this 
>> list. The
>> discussion started because the Discovery Institute (www.discovery.org, 
>> one
>> of the sites you listed) managed to show an ID film at the 
>> Smithsonian. Say
>> what you will about creationism/ID, it is not science. The overwhelming
>> majority of evolutionary scientists reject ID not because these 
>> scientists
>> do not believe in God (in fact, I'd venture a guess that the vast 
>> majority
>> do), but because ID does not hold up to established scientific 
>> principles.
>> ID is an attempt to infuse scientific jargon into creationism and pass it
>> off as science hoping to challenge evolution/Darwinism and its teachings,
>> which some (many?) people view as a direct confrontation to religion.
>>
>> Already schools are being forced to teach ID instead of or in addition to
>> evolution. There are iMax theaters in science museums refusing to show
>> movies that promote evolution. And exhibition developers are being
>> challenged by those who believe evolution conflicts with
>> religion/spirituality.
>>
>> Like it or not, the "ideology of anything not directly related to the
>> profession" you wrote about is spilling into museums and, as a result, 
>> this
>> list. Because of Discovery Institute and a number of other challenges to
>> science museums, it is relevant to our profession. How should museums
>> dedicated to science react to creationism/ID? How do they continue to
>> promote good science when a number of Americans see conflict between
>> scientific evolution and creationist inspired pseudo-scientific ID? And
>> aren't the vast majority of discussions on this thread indicative of the
>> struggles in the museum field and the American public to rectify two
>> seemingly competing ideas?
>>
>>
>> Best wishes and thanks to all for a healthy and spirited debate,
>>
>> George Garner
>> Director of Exhibitions
>> Center for History
>> 808 West Washington, South Bend, IN 46601
>> www.centerforhistory.org // (574) 235-9664
>>
>>
>> --------
>> Celebrate Historic Gardens Month in June at the Center for History by
>> visiting the exhibition, Gardens, and strolling the beautiful grounds
>> surrounding the Oliver mansion.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stefanie T Rookis" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 10:40 AM
>> Subject: For those interested in evolution AND Intelligent Design . . .
>>
>>
>> http://www.discovery.org/csc/
>>
>> http://www.designinference.com/
>>
>> still, I maintain even my contributions to this thread are inappropriate
>> for Museum-L, but since only one side of the story is given....
>>
>> when you move past museum issues and into ideology of anything not
>> directly related to the profession, go to another discussion list or
>> have a private email exchange, lest there be chaos. i.e. anyone care to
>> disagree that sitcom television is dead? anyone?
>>
>> ironically, there are some folks on this discussion list that are not
>> evolving to a higher professional life form.
>>
>> thanks to those that gave off-list support and advised I return to
>> ignoring/deleting the too predictable and extraneous noise machines.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Stefanie
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>> Behalf Of Indigo Nights
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 9:56 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [MUSEUM-L] For those interested in evolution . . .
>>
>> The Woodstock of Evolution
>>
>> The World Summit on Evolution, held in the Galapagos
>> Islands, revealed a science rich in history and
>> tradition, data and theory, as well as controversy and
>> debate.
>> http://cl.exct.net/?ffcd16-fe4f1674706d0d757012-fe2616707367037f711d78
>>
>>
>>
>> Indigo Nights
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> =========================================================
>> Important Subscriber Information:
>>
>> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
>> http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
>> information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
>> message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
>> read "help" (without the quotes).
>>
>> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message
>> to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read
>> "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
>>
>> =========================================================
>> Important Subscriber Information:
>>
>> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
>> http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
>> information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail 
>> message
>> to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read 
>> "help"
>> (without the quotes).
>>
>> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
>> [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read 
>> "Signoff
>> Museum-L" (without the quotes).
>>
>> =========================================================
>> Important Subscriber Information:
>>
>> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at 
>> http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed 
>> information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail 
>> message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message 
>> should read "help" (without the quotes).
>>
>> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message 
>> to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read 
>> "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
>>
> 
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
> 
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at 
> http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed 
> information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail 
> message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should 
> read "help" (without the quotes).
> 
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message 
> to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read 
> "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
> 

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).