"Darwin Day," a celebration of "the life of Charles Darwin as the symbol for a global celebration of science and humanity" is coming to a school near you on February 12, 2008.
Sponsored by the InstituteÂ for Humanist Studies, their website encourages that Darwin DayÂ be celebrated at: "civic ceremonies with official proclamations, educational symposia, birthday parties, art shows, book discussions, lobby days, games, protests, and dinner parties. Organizers may include: academic societies, science organizations, free thought groups, religious congregations, libraries, museums, galleries, teachers and students, families and friends."
Since Charles Darwin was both the 'father' of evolution and an atheist, a brief look atÂ a few of theÂ views ofÂ today's atheistÂ evolutionists reveals some ofÂ the 'fruit' of his theory:
Richard Dawkins, a devotee of Charles Darwin, said that everyone believed in evolution except "the ignorant, stupid or wicked."
There are some atheists who believe in 'intelligent design,' but not by a Creator. They believe an alien life force is a possible option for explaining creation, and they are serious.
Many may be surprised to know that Francis Crick, Nobel Prize winner and one of the discoverers ofÂ the structure of DNA, the genetic blueprint for life, believes that life forms were sent to earth in a space ship by a dying civilization. As a matter of fact, both discoverers of the DNA, Watson and Crick, are outspoken atheists.
But not only atheist advocates of evolution are promoting the theory of evolution, the mainstream media are as well, such as when MSNBC did an entire series on where the human species is headed inÂ "Human Evolution at the Crossroads," discussingÂ such ideasÂ as Unihumans.
Could these, and other such worldviews, be a force behind the battle over allowing creationism to be taught in schools? Yes, I think so.
While objective scientists are investigating whether or not there is evidence that life on earthÂ is the work ofÂ an Intelligent Designer, and despite the fact that IDÂ (Intelligent Design) isÂ called a theory, many in the scientific community do not recognize it as a theory butÂ rather as a religious view, and therefore rejectÂ investigating the possibility of an Intelligent Designer.
This, of course, begs the following questions:
1) Why would scientists not welcome the search for evidence in regards to the possibility of Intelligent Design when it is the very (purported) nature of science to explore all possibilities?
2) Is science broad enough to allow forÂ all theories of human origins?
3) And is the teaching of the theory of Intelligent Design, using scientific evidence, the same that is claimed to be used in teaching Darwinism, reasonable?
All major religions acknowledge a Creator God. So, is the debate over teaching creationism or intelligent design alongside evolution in schools a sound scientific battle -- or a worldview battle? The theory of evolution has only existed since the 19th century. Christianity has existed for over 2,000 years and Judaism, longer still.Â What do you think?
Just for the record, Darwin believed that there is no ultimate meaning in life. I guess that makes sense if you also believe your uncle was a monkey.