[Dealy (Kev)]

My 2 bobs worth...
Emotions usually run high when this subject comes up. Everybody is biased one way or the other and usually don’t like to be challenged by those with an opposing viewpoint.
But if it’s possible to look at this without emotion, and for the sake of the argument bring it right back to one question, that of origins (ie Where did all this come from?), then it becomes an interesting topic.
Followers in the Intelligent Design camp might say that an intelligent Designer existed prior to anything else in the universe. Most believe the Designer created time itself. Nobody knows where the Designer came from or if it even had a beginning. Then this Designer through supreme intellect and power created everything we see today, including the laws of mathematics and physics that govern the universe.
Evolutionists might say that a small, dense body of material that contained all the mass in the universe once existed for some unknown length of time. Where it came from nobody knows. This mass sat there until, for some unknown reason, it became unstable and exploded. Some believe time itself didn’t exist prior to this explosion. This cloud of ejected matter has been expanding and changing form ever since. The laws that now govern the universe came about totally randomly and have brought into existence what we see today.
Both hypotheses are unprovable and require a large element of faith to elevate one above the other as being the truth or more truthful. All we can do is theorise about the distant past. Nothing is proven nor can it be. Either the Designer has existed forever or Matter has existed forever.
I believe the argument is not science vs religion but the science of one religion vs the science of another. There are many scientists that believe in ID, and obviously many more that believe in Evolution. The number of followers however does not prove or disprove either viewpoint. The truth may in fact lie somewhere in-between.
So which bias is the best bias? My unbiased opinion says my bias.