Over the years, the debate of where
man really came from has been going on like a silent war. The sides of
Intelligent Design versus Evolution have both done anything but stop in their
search for greater proof and more evidence. If anything, there have been
significant instances where the search for the existence of such evidence has
stirred ruckus. Sides have had moments of bringing down the other in the fight
of having just one side win over the crowd, which in this debate, is the whole
world.
The theory of Intelligent Design is
based on the stories and beliefs from the different books and teachings of
religion. It states that it is an omnipotent being who has designed and created
all of life. The theory supports the idea that every single creature, including
humans, has its own design and make which has been the same since the beginning
of time. This means that after thousands of years, the structure and DNA of all
living things – animals, plants, humans – is consistent over time. It also says
that every creature is responsible to keep its own kind populated. As an
example, people give birth to human babies; cats deliver cats, and so on. Dogs
do not produce pigs, and plants do not bear birds.
The
theory of Evolution was founded by Charles Darwin, the reason why it is also
called Darwinism. The theory suggests that there is only one root of all life.
This means that all living things have come about to existence with a common
ancestor. Through generations, the structure of the bodies of the different
life forms had been modified in small and large scales, which in turn produced
different living forms. This means that humans have the same origins as the
flowers, insects, and birds do.
In the side of Intelligent Design,
propagators believe that their theory is nothing like what the opposition
suggests. Darwinists say that Intelligent Design is based on pure faith and
beliefs and does not have enough concrete evidence to stand by its claims.
However, supporters of Intelligent Design have been performing scientific and
biological experiments and studies on their own. This proves the notion that
Intelligent Design is non-science as false. A good example of this is Jonathan
Wells, who holds a Ph.D. in both religious studies from Yale University as well
as one in molecular and cell biology from the University of California at
Berkeley. The author of many articles and books is currently working on a
number of empirical and theoretical researches in the field of cell and
developmental biology. He follows a hypothesis guided by the principles of
Intelligent Design in studying the location/s of non-DNA information in the
embryo, analysing it as a whole – which is different from the idea of these
non-DNA parts of the embryo as “accidental by-products” of DNA mutations and natural
selection. In an interview, he said, “I compare Darwinism to a frozen pond in
the springtime. As winter passes and the days grow longer, the ice may look
thick, but it becomes honeycombed with melt water. In the next thaw it may
disappear overnight.”
It is strongly stated that
Intelligent Design is a scientific theory, based on facts, following a
systematic method, and undergoes continuous experimentation and research. This makes
it something more than the theory of Creation, which merely focuses on how an
ultimate being created the world and all the living things in it.
Intelligent
Design argues that it is not possible for all the complexities of the systems,
organs, and functions of the human body (as well as those of other living
creatures) to have come to what they are today (and in the past) without some
definite design or guidance. As people learn more and more about these
complexities and marvels, the theory of Intelligent Design is further
supported.
This
is grounded furthermore on the basis that all of life comes from a powerful god
or deity (which can vary depending on what religion a person believes in). This
god is responsible for crafting together the “intelligent design” which is
applied to all forms of life and carried out all throughout time. For example,
Christians may view this as the Genesis passage in the Holy Bible where God
created the world and everything that lives in it in a matter of six days.
Other religions have their own versions of the story of creation, with
different gods and circumstances. However, the main idea is maintained. There
is one ultimate engineer and architect who put to play this blueprint that is
still occurring to the present day.
The
side of the theory of Evolution, however, contests to this claim. They believe
that people only follow such theory due to lack of scientific knowledge and
factual evidence. Darwin’s theory focuses on the diversity of the species of
life. Fossils have been the brainchild of all paleontological research in the
name of the Darwinist theory. The theory suggests that supporters of
Intelligent Design are mere fanatics and that their faith cannot prove anything
feasible. The “unthinkability” of the origins of that theory seems far-fetched
and they prefer something that can be based on real happenings. This is one of
the reasons why Darwinism has been supported openly by Atheist groups and
various institutes of humanities all over the world.
There
has been speculation in the relevance of the theory of Evolution. Skeptics say
that it being a “theory” does not make it more than plain talk and thoughts.
The defense for this is citing other theories. Take the theory of relativity by
Einstein and the gravitational theory by Newton. These are termed “theories”
but are applied in daily life. They hold much significance in practical
application whether it is chosen or not. The same applies for the theory of
Evolution. The
theory supports natural selection, which means only the fittest and strongest forms of
life survived, along with significant modifications that are needed for
survival in the ever-changing world. This means that there is no upper hand.
Life merely survives and changes as it goes on through the process.
In
the recent years, each of the two sides kept bickering over which was what and
which was not. Neutral advocates have started coming out to clear up that
although the two sides’ claims to belief are in no way similar to each other –
opposing to some degree, even – this does not mean that religion and science
(or Intelligent Design and Evolution) should be at war.
Some
supporters of Intelligent Design question such advocacy and complain that the
theory of Evolution goes against ethical principles and should not be taught in
schools all over the country. The answer of the advocates is that these are two
entirely separate subjects which should not be taught with too much relation to
each other. As such, religion should focus on the good morals and lessons in a
religion class, while science should focus on volcanic activity, the pollination
of plants, the kinds of birds, et cetera, in a science class.
In
conclusion, there is still a lot to be studied, researched and discovered in
the search for the ultimate answer to the ultimate question. At present,
everything still lies within the discretion and opinion of every individual.
