Because science has introduced the world to a great number of achievements in medicine, technology, and numerous other factors, people have grown to place a high value on the teachings of science. This is a good thing. No one can make a coherent argument against the value of the great number of lives that have been saved due to the scientific advances in medicine. The great problem arises, though, when science becomes not just one of the many ways that we acquire knowledge, but the only way; that if we cannot test something scientifically, it cannot be true. This is exactly the belief that sways people to abandon any information that leads to supernatural beliefs. I must point out here, though, that the core belief (that only things that can be tested and proven by scientific means) cannot itself be tested by science. Even though one might attempt to prove the statement philosophically, philosophy is outside of the realm of science so, by definition, the philosophical defense cannot be accepted.

But just because the belief cannot pass its own test does not mean that it will not be widely accepted. Science has become the only reliable source of information, but what happens when the findings of different scientists conflict with each other? When two different groups of scientists look at the same data and come up with different information, which conclusions are the correct ones? The answer depends on what is being tested. The intelligent design movement has proven to be a worthy adversary to the widely-accepted scientific theory of Darwinian evolution. Work by Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, William Dembski and numerous others have offered a viable scientific alternative to the popular theory, but their work has been dismissed as “unscientific” not because it does not follow established scientific procedures or accurately report its findings, but because its findings are compatible with the creation account found in the Biblical book of Genesis.

Although intelligent design never claims that the Genesis account is true (aliens or even a machine created by aliens or a past generation of human beings more intelligent than us) could have created the universe, the elite scientists see that it also leaves room for the Judeo-Christian God as well. To risk stating the obvious, scientists are not stupid. They know that culture has defined them as holding the key to knowledge and do not want anyone else to get a copy. If religion is allowed to open the door, then they lose their power; knowledge can be found elsewhere, in the pages of the Bible for example.