May the Intelligent Desing and Evolution Theory can work together. What do you think about it?
340031
Nope. \nIt would be like putting mobsters and Mother Theressa to work together. \nBesides, there´s no proof for inteligent design. Just suppositions. \nEvolution, on the other side is a FACT. \nHow could you put them together?
1107979
Definitely.  In only a few billion years our sun will expand and make our planet uninhabitable.  Long before that things will get very difficult for life on this planet.  Evolution of communities of organisms that can travel interstellarly is essentially impossible without intelligence.  The only real way for this experiment in complex life to persist in this universe will be through the actions taken by humans and posthuman intelligent life.  Without the evolution of intelligence, life is doomed to live out a fairly short span of time relative to the duration of the universe in its current life-friendly status.
1143148
Evolutionists argue that life of all forms evolved from primitive to more complex forms in response to the environment.\n\nIntelligent designers argue that none of this evolution stuff would work without a higher intelligence (read God) to get it all going in the first place.  Generally seen as another attempt to inject fundamentalism into the government so we can enjoy the same kind of life as our muslim brothers.......\n\nDisclaimer:  None of the above was researched anywhere on the web.  100% original Steve
1004804
The thought is that life (all of it) came from a single organism and over a long time has become what we can see today. An example i can think of that has occurred over a short enough time span that we can use would be Human intelligence, size relative to geography, and skin color relative to geography.  We as humans are smarter today than generations past, for instance modern man 10000 years ago did not have the smarts we have today, do you believe it is due to school or human mental advancement(evolution). There is an extremely noticeable difference between natives of different geographical locations. Darker skin in the hotter regions and lighter skin in the regions with less sun per year. ie Africa and Europe  The theory is very well developed and provable back to a certain point.  And NO ONE said that a GOD didn't strike the first amino acid with the lightening to start the evolution.
20181
Hi yes I believe in evolution, its the only feasable explanation of how we developed into what we look and act like today. See the links below for more information.
997052
The theory evolved based on the facts that have been observed in the universe. The theory may not be correct or accurate but it does fit the facts and it is the only explanation anyone has been able to give to fit the facts.  \n\nIf you have a better one let's hear it.
1004784
I.D. shows us that within the gaps in science, the signature of God, the Creator (Designer) is found.  All the unanswered questions of Theology and Science can be answered when you merge equal parts of each.  \n\nOnly through true harmonious integration of theology and science can our world be completely understood (and logically explained).  \n\n* There are proven gaps in scientific knowledge.\n* Intelligence leaves behind a characteristic signature (like an artist) of logical progression through a series of systematic methodical stages.\n* The gaps in science are filled in by acts of a Designer.\n* The scientific study of fossil records reveals these signatures again and again.\n* God Created the process of Evolution!\n* Evolution shows the existence of God!\n\nThe key Principle of I.D. is Science Harmoniously Integrating Theology (or S.H.I.T.)  \n\nIntelligent Design - coming soon to a school near you.\n\nGlory be ID
879038
you should believe in intelligent design because if you think about it, the chances that the world and all of the diverse animal and plant life just "happened" are sooooooooo slim, it's pretty much impossible. an interesting book on the subject is "the evolution of a creationist". very fascinating...\n\nanother thing to think about- how can something come from nothing? scientists have tried to make something from nothing, and they have been unsuccessful.
291260
Adaptation? Evolution?
397544
There is plenty of unintelligent design to dismiss this idea.\n\nAn irreducibly complex system can be built gradually by adding parts that, while initially just advantageous, become - because of later changes - essential. The logic is very simple. Some part (A) initially does some job (and not very well, perhaps). Another part (B) later gets added because it helps A. This new part isn't essential, it merely improves things. But later on, A (or something else) may change in such a way that B now becomes indispensable. This process continues as further parts get folded into the system. And at the end of the day, many parts may all be required."\n\nH. Allen Orr\n\nIntelligent design does not discount everything in evolution, and so they would agree with mainstream science on the answers to most of your questions. Intelligent design allows boils down to God planned it that way.  That's why it can't be taught alongside evolution, because it involves belief, not evidence.\n\n"ID advocates are very keen to give the impression that they have the support of scientists. It is true that a number of scientists support ID, as indeed there are scientists who support Young Earth Creationism and many other pseudosciences. But they are a tiny number in relation to the total number of scientists, the vast majority of whom support evolutionary theory."\n\n...\n\n"What are the "scientific" arguments used to support Intelligent Design?\n\nA. The arguments for Intelligent Design are primarily arguments from ignorance, also known as god-of-the-gaps arguments. ID advocates also claim to have positive evidence of ID, in the form of "specified complexity" and "irreducible complexity", but these arguments turn out to be disguised arguments from ignorance. In addition, ID advocates sometimes make an argument from analogy. A lot of their effort is also devoted to attacking specific aspects of evolutionary theory, rather than giving support to their own ID hypothesis.\n\nhttp://www.talkdesign.org/introfaq.html
307239
I don't think you will get a satisfying answer becausae you worded your question in a rather confusing fashion.\n\nIf you don't want to discuss natural selection, don't use the word evolution at all.  Ask about Big Bang Cosmologies instead.
1138218
I will have to support Evolution! Let me give you a definition of Evolution!\nBiological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations).\nDocumentation of ancestor-descendant relationships among organisms also comes from the fields of biogeography, taxonomy, anatomy, embryology and, most recently, genetics — particularly DNA analysis.\nThe fossil record remains first and foremost among the databases that document changes in past life on Earth. Fossils provide the dimension of time to the study of life. Some of the most basic observations about fossils and the rock record were made long before Darwin formulated his theory of “descent with modification.” The fossil record clearly shows changes in life through almost any sequence of sedimentary rock layers. Successive rock layers contain different groups or assemblages of fossil species.\n{We have now more than enough fossils to determine for sure that humans didn’t appear on this planet in the genetic form they are today!\nWE HAVE MORE THAN ENOUGH EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS AT LEAST ANOTHER SPECIES WHICH LIVED WITH US!! And I am talking about Neanderthal man who was not our ancestor but a different Human than us!!! (Did God experiment with human species?) We even have proof that at a certain point in time 3 human species shared the planet! (Homo sapiens, Homo Erectus, Homo Neanderthals)}\nOf course I want comment the stupid argument why all the apes didn’t evolve to humans. Ok I will comment!!\n(We share a recent common ancestor with chimpanzees and gorillas; we have many anatomical, genetic, biochemical, and even behavioral similarities with these African great apes. We are less similar to the Asian apes--orangutans and gibbons--and even less similar to monkeys, because we share common ancestors with these groups in the more distant past. \n! By the way why God decided to create 5 different species of primates and 280 different species of monkeys?)\nAs a conclusion Evolution is not a theory but a proven fact (In scientific terms, "theory" does not mean "guess" or "hunch" as it does in everyday usage. Scientific theories are explanations of natural phenomena built up logically from testable observations and hypotheses. Biological evolution is the best scientific explanation we have for the enormous range of observations about the living world.) Creation is a Hebrew Myth and unfortunately is not a fact but a myth!!!!
528044
It does not matter what I believe. The theory of evolution by natural selection is overwhelmingly supported by fact and argument. Intelligent Design is not supported by any facts that I know of and the argument seems to be basically, " a argument from ignorance ".
917330
In my opinion, things are just way to complex for general evolution. I could see maybe a large colony of mold somehow coming into being on it's own,, but all the complexity we have here., No chance.
350652
Here you go, check this out.\n\nhttp://evolution.berkeley.edu/
550523
Just remember, evolution is an untested, unproven theory.  In fact, it cannot be tested or proven.  If one looks at the scientific method and what constitutes a theory, evolution barely qualifies, if at all.
724158
Er... the theory of evoltion?  It's just a theory though.  Lots of loop holes.  :)