Skip to main content

Intelligent design distorted

I was disappointed by the misinformation in John Kelleher's article about creationism ("In the beginning...", TES Teacher magazine, May 5).

As a parent of secondary-age children, I believe that science classes should focus on evidence, not mere opinion. If Mr Kelleher is so sure that intelligent design is not based on evidence but on faith, then why the need to misrepresent the views of Professor Michael Behe, one of ID's foremost advocates?

Professor Behe has never written about the fossil record or dinosaurs, and accepts both the conventional geological timescale and common ancestry. As a biochemist, he has argued cogently for design in the biochemical components of the cell, and it was in this entirely different context that he wrote what was quoted. ID certainly raises real educational issues for teaching science. One only hopes that teachers will look at what ID advocates are really saying.

Dr Alistair Donald

1 Fordyce Terrace New Deer, Aberdeenshire

Log in or register for FREE to continue reading.

It only takes a moment and you'll get access to more news, plus courses, jobs and teaching resources tailored to you