They meet (and diverge) at the beginning of life. Everything after that is essentially identical. They both adhere to the concept that lifeforms change (evolve) over time. One says it is happenstance, the other that it is purposeful. Either way, the science of evolution beyond the creation of life is exactly the same.TheAussieReaper wrote:
It's both.FEOS wrote:
No, it isn't. Intelligent design vs evolution is a theological point, not a biological point.PureFodder wrote:
The article said that the guy believed in intelligent design. The book, amongst other things, presents a good argument against intelligent design and for evolution, which is appropriate for a biology class.
Intelligent design pushes the idea in a designer. Evolution does not.
Blind watchmaker theory.
Thus, it is a theological debate, not a scientific one--and has no place in a biology class.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular