Fact, faith and fiction

Listen up, you damn dirty apes. \nTwo weeks ago, a lawmaker introduced into Georgia's statehouse a law to prevent the teaching of evolution in Georgia schools. In November of 2004, a school district in Atlanta ordered that a sticker calling evolution a "theory, not a fact" be placed on science books. And last month, the school board of Dover, Pa., voted to make teachers discuss "flaws" in the work of Charles Darwin. \nIt seems some of us aren't as evolved as others.\nThese are all attempts from fundamentalist Christians to muscle their faith into public schools. By attacking evolution, they think they can install their beliefs in classrooms. By being taught in schools, they think their religion becomes legitimized in the mainstream.\nCreationism should not be taught in science courses, not even as an alternative to evolution. Science is, and has been, the study of the natural world around us. Creationism, now called "intelligent design," is the supernatural. The scientific theory uses experiments to determine the properties of what we can touch, hold and break apart. The supernatural simply cannot be measured this way.\nPart of the case against evolution comes from a misunderstanding of the word "theory." In normal conversation, the word "theory" is synonymous with "educated guess." However, in science, "theory" refers to an explanation based on observation and proven experiments. Much like the theory of gravity or the theory of relativity, the theory of evolution has enough evidence to prove its truthfulness.\nThere is an abundance of physical evidence for evolution, but hardly any for intelligent design. The skeletons of snakes and whales still contain vestigial pelvic bones. Flightless birds, like the penguin, have the same hollow bone structure that their flying brethren do. Unessential body parts like these seem inefficient in a perfect creation. Speaking of perfect creations, a famous 1985 article by evolutionist Jared Diamond notes that the eye of a squid is more perfectly engineered than that of vertebrates, even those of humans. The article's title sums up his position: "If the creationists are right, God is a squid."\nIn that case, I am definitely going to Hell for dissecting one of His chosen in high school biology.\nIntelligent design, on the other hand, holds no solid facts. It is based on faith, and, presumably, the Bible. Neither can be subjectively measured. The creationism that lawmakers and school board members want to incorporate into curriculum is the Judeo-Christian creation myth. If life on Earth was created by an intelligent being, does that mean it has to be the Christian God? What about other religions' creation stories? Should they be taught too? Could aliens have built the human race? Or is the creator none of these? Does the intelligent being create animals perfect right off the assembly line, or are they tweaked along the way? We simply don't know. Proponents of intelligent design don't try to answer any of these questions. How does a creator create life?\nBut believing in evolution does not mean one cannot be faithful. Old Earth creationists believe in the Big Bang, and the following scientific timeline is correct. Even the Vatican claims no controversy between the two. In 1996, Pope John Paul II stated there was no conflict between creationism and evolution, because they both attempt to examine the soul through different means.\nCreationism is an interesting philosophical concept, but not a scientific one. The supernatural origins of the universe, if indeed there are any, are philosophical questions, not scientific ones. Therefore, they should be taught in philosophy or religious studies courses. \nWhenever religion enters a discussion, tempers flare. Science, on the other hand, is cold and detached. The two should remain separate and not cross in the classroom.