Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Intelligent design

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 04:54, 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 39: Line 35:
*'''[[Argument: Intelligent design offers no scientific, predictive value| Intelligent design offers no scientific, predictive value]]''' *'''[[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]]
- +
-*'''[[Argument: Intelligent design closes scientific inquiry| Intelligent design closes scientific inquiry]] the idea that “some things are too complex” is anti-scientific, since it seems to suggest that we shouldn’t try to understand the origins of the complex structures. ID discourages us from looking and asking questions. True science, however, moves on. If it is later found to be the case that some structures in organisms do not have more primitive counterparts, science will observe and recognize this fact, and the new knowledge will be incorporated into evolutionary theory. +
Line 47: Line 41:
|- |-
|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 60: 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 82: Line 76:
|- |-
|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
.