Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Intelligent design

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 01:56, 31 January 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(No)
← Previous diff
Current revision (02:23, 17 May 2010) (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Write Subquestion here...)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style=""|
===Is Intelligent Design a legitimate scientific theory?=== ===Is Intelligent Design a legitimate scientific theory?===
-|} 
- 
-{| style="width:100%; height:100px" border="0" align="center" 
-|__TOC__ 
|} |}
Line 12: Line 8:
|- |-
|bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"| |bgcolor="#F7F7F7" colspan="2" style= "border:1px solid #BAC5FD"|
-===Background and Context of Debate:===+===Background and context ===
|} |}
Line 22: Line 18:
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
-===Write Subquestion here...===+=== Is intelligent design science? ===
|- |-
Line 32: Line 28:
====No==== ====No====
-''Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here''+ 
 +*'''[[Argument: Intelligent design does not restrict itself to scientific observation| Intelligent design does not restrict itself to scientific observation]]'''
 + 
 +*'''[[Argument: Intelligent design cannot be scientifically tested| Intelligent design cannot be scientifically tested]]'''
 + 
 +*'''[[Argument: Intelligent design offers no scientific, predictive value| Intelligent design offers no scientific, predictive value]]'''
 + 
 +*'''[[Argument: Intelligent design closes scientific inquiry| Intelligent design closes scientific inquiry]]
 + 
 + 
 + 
|- |-
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
- +=== Write subquestion here... ===
-===Write Subquestion here...===+
|- |-
Line 49: Line 54:
|- |-
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
-===Write Subquestion here...===+===Pro/con sources:===
|- |-
Line 55: Line 60:
====Yes==== ====Yes====
-''Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here''+*[http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/832 "The Science Behind Intelligent Design Theory". Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center. Retrieved 1.30.08]
-|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "YES" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|+
 +
 +
 +|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "YES" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE width="45%" bgcolor="#F2FAFB" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em;"|
====No==== ====No====
*[http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/236793_inteldop.html Richard Olmstead. "Intelligent Design not science". Seattle PI. August 17, 2005] *[http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/236793_inteldop.html Richard Olmstead. "Intelligent Design not science". Seattle PI. August 17, 2005]
*[http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/ap_051118_ID_vatican.html Nicole Winfield, Associated Press. "Vatican Astronomer: Intelligent Design is Not Science". Live Science. November 18, 2005] *[http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/ap_051118_ID_vatican.html Nicole Winfield, Associated Press. "Vatican Astronomer: Intelligent Design is Not Science". Live Science. November 18, 2005]
- +*[http://csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/not-science.html Penny Higgins. "Why 'Intelligent Design' (ID) is not science, and why, therefore, it should not be taught in a science curriculum". Retrieved 1.30.08]
 +*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI001.html "Claim CI001: Intelligent design theory is science." The Talk Origins Archive.]
 +*[http://csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/not-science.html "Why 'Intelligent Design' (ID) is not science." Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. Retrieved 1.30.08]
|- |-
|WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"| |WRITE CONTENT FOR THE "NO" BOX ABOVE THIS CODE colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top: 0.5em ;"|
-===References:=== +==External links==
-|-+
-|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;"|+
-===Related pages on Debatepedia:===+
-|-+
-|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;"| +
-===External links and resources:===+|}
- +[[Category:Intelligent design]]
-|}+[[Category:Evolution]]
 +[[Category:Science]]

Current revision

[Digg]
[reddit]
[Delicious]
[Facebook]

Is Intelligent Design a legitimate scientific theory?

Background and context

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]

Is intelligent design science?

[Add New]

Yes

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

[Add New]

No


[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Write subquestion here...

[Add New]

Yes

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

[Add New]

No

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section up]

Pro/con sources:

[Add New]

Yes


[Add New]

No


External links

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.