In scientific use, a hypothesis must be testable. The word “hypothesis” can be used more loosely in a non-scientific context, but we are talking about a science curriculum here.
We can test for intelligent design. All we need to do is find some evidence.
Since there is no supporting evidence, it fails the test. Just like the hypothesis that the planets affect our destiny or that essential oils can heal people.
Supporting evidence of what though? What testable thing would we even be looking for? Intelligent Design doesn’t predict what the creator is, how to detect it, or what process it uses to create. Intelligent Design has a concept of “irreducible complexity”, but you can’t test that.
Intentional design would not include things like terrible spine structure for humans, which is clearly shown to be an evolutionary change that wasn’t bad enough to not work out but is also clearly a recent change. Then there are the different animals that went extinct because of evolutionary pressure. Irreducible complexity is shown to be bullshit because we always find the ‘missing steps’ or gaps in evolution when we find new fossils.
Heck, most of the examples the people who promote the idea are things that humans intentionally changed over time like bananas and corn, which undermines their arguments of some kind of higher power doing the same.
Intelligent design isn’t even a hypothesis. In order to be one, it would have to be falsifiable.
Anything can be a hypothesis.
In scientific use, a hypothesis must be testable. The word “hypothesis” can be used more loosely in a non-scientific context, but we are talking about a science curriculum here.
We can test for intelligent design. All we need to do is find some evidence.
Since there is no supporting evidence, it fails the test. Just like the hypothesis that the planets affect our destiny or that essential oils can heal people.
Supporting evidence of what though? What testable thing would we even be looking for? Intelligent Design doesn’t predict what the creator is, how to detect it, or what process it uses to create. Intelligent Design has a concept of “irreducible complexity”, but you can’t test that.
Looking for evidence of intentional design.
Intentional design would not include things like terrible spine structure for humans, which is clearly shown to be an evolutionary change that wasn’t bad enough to not work out but is also clearly a recent change. Then there are the different animals that went extinct because of evolutionary pressure. Irreducible complexity is shown to be bullshit because we always find the ‘missing steps’ or gaps in evolution when we find new fossils.
Heck, most of the examples the people who promote the idea are things that humans intentionally changed over time like bananas and corn, which undermines their arguments of some kind of higher power doing the same.