Intelligent design distorted

26th May 2006 at 01:00
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

Subscribe to get access to the content on this page.

If you are already a Tes/ Tes Scotland subscriber please log in with your username or email address to get full access to our back issues, CPD library and membership plus page.

Not a subscriber? Find out more about our subscription offers.
Subscribe now
Existing subscriber?
Enter subscription number


The guide by your side – ensuring you are always up to date with the latest in education.

Get Tes magazine online and delivered to your door. Stay up to date with the latest research, teacher innovation and insight, plus classroom tips and techniques with a Tes magazine subscription.
With a Tes magazine subscription you get exclusive access to our CPD library. Including our New Teachers’ special for NQTS, Ed Tech, How to Get a Job, Trip Planner, Ed Biz Special and all Tes back issues.

Subscribe now