Religion vs. Science:
The current controversy in regard to the oxymoronic concept of "intelligent design", should be seen for what it is, a strategic retreat from the bedrock of faith based on revelation. It is a rearguard action by those whose superstitious beliefs are withering in the sun of science.
In all of these discussions the creationists, closet or otherwise, bemoan the "loss of a moral compass" and question "Why are we here", and "What is the meaning of the universe".
The first of these is easy enough to dismiss. Man is a social animal that evolved the necessary instinctual constraints that enable us to live together. A functional human does not need revelation to know not to mate with one's siblings or murder one's parents. Even dogs have "morals" or they could not form a pack.
As to why we are here, why that's simple too, we had parents. Genomic studies have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that we are part of an unbroken chain of inheritance extending back to the dawn of life.
Which brings us to the final unanswerable question, "Why is there something rather than nothing?" It is here that the creationists should build their final redoubt, for science has no answer as yet.
The ability to ask "why" is a uniquely human trait. We posit the assumption that there must be "meaning" in the universe, then fill the void with our most cherished beliefs, most of which are derived from tales intended to frighten children told around the campfire thousands of years ago.
These tales have value. They are part of our heritage and many are instructive, but they are no substitute for science and have no place in the classroom or in the formulation of public policy.
Bruce J. Morgan
Archer, FL 32618 USA
352 495 9748