15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

The linked article included herein is a good start for someone to study if they want to move beyond a dilettante's view of the Intelligent Design versus Science debate. If someone is simply supporting Intelligent Design because of their religious faith and aren't making debating it part of their interactions with others, not much point in wading through it.

If you did intend to debate it though, knowledge of the opposite side's position is essential. I am not sure this article is the best possible one available, but it makes an attempt at being thorough, even with its clear bias.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

Personally, I think the very basis for the argument itself is off. I was thinking of the example of a painting. Science would be like trying to get all the information that went into the painting, like which pigments, which type of paint, what is it painted on, the light reflecting qualities of the painting, width of the brush strokes, etc, etc. Intelligent Design is more about who is the painter and why did He paint it. Science is about how it was painted.

One is an objective, the other is a subjective view of the painting, and to argue "who" and "why" versus "how" is a false dichotomy. Those who promote their angle, on both sides of the issue, without seeing the completeness and harmony of the material world, are not seeing the whole truth, which includes both. So I don't put much energy into it, but do offer this link to those who wish for a more in depth understanding.