Question #1

I think scientist are quick to dismiss the intelligent design community because each group have their own interpretation of facts! Another words, scientist formulate their conclusions around what they can prove scientifically, while the intelligent design community formulate their conclusion around what science can not prove! The scientific community appear dismissive to the intelligent design community, perhaps even arrogant in their assumption that evolution is fact, as defined scientifically. Whereas, scientists appear to regard the intelligent design community as having NO intelligent at all. The intelligent design community focuses on the lack of proof regarding "The Beginning" or as scientist refer to as "The Big Bang". Intelligent design believers focus on the complexity of life systems as proof that a higher power was needed for such diverse systems. My belief is the intelligent design community does have a valid point. Science can not prove The Big Bang beyond a reasonable doubt(at least not yet) but they can prove a vast majority of evolution as fact scientifically. I believe the intelligent design community relies on one specific issue(The Big Bang) to discredit evolution. Scientist need to lay out all the scientific factual evidence and compare to the intelligent design evidence. Start the discussion as if both groups know nothing and build a foundation of knowledge. Only later, begin to link evidence that would support evolution.