Revision as of 19:58, 5 September 2018 edit PaleoNeonate (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 29,743 edits Add missing url, thanks for noticing ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:39, 27 November 2018 edit undo Bobwiley22 (talk \| contribs) 60 edits Undid revision 847346287 by Dave souza (talk): Majority viewpoint attempting to present a view that there are no divergent views within the scientific community on this matter. To deny that many scientists hold to ID is to deny facts. (Michael Behee; John Weeks... there are literally thousands. Especially globally). Or to try to re-write the name "scientist" to include only those who agree with the currently en vogue position. Tag: Undo Next edit →
Line 1: {{Intelligent Design}} The relationship between '''intelligent design and science''' has been a contentious one. [[Intelligent design]] (ID) is presented by its proponents as science and claims to offer an alternative to [[evolution]]. The [[Discovery Institute]], a politically conservative think tank and the leading proponent of intelligent design, launched a campaign entitled "Teach the Controversy" which claims that a controversy exists within the scientific community over evolution. ~~The~~ Some within the scientific community, however, ~~rejects~~reject intelligent design as a form of [[creationism]]. ~~The basic facts of evolution are not a matter of controversy in science.~~ =="Teach the Controversy"==

Intelligent design and science: Difference between revisions