♦ ficino ♦ Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Verlyn Klinkenborg in the NY Times had a nice summary of ID and its aims: "Intelligent design is not a theory at all, as scientists understand the word, but a well-financed political and religious campaign to muddy science. Its basic proposition -- the intervention of a designer, a k a God -- cannot be tested. It has no evidence to offer, and its assumptions that humans were divinely created are the same as its conclusions. Its objections to evolution are based on syllogistic reasoning and a highly selective treatment of the physical evidence." You cannot refute this. The most you can do is 1) offer examples of incredibly complex organisms. That is not evidence for the claim that God created anything. 2) throw around guesswork about probability 3) point out some scientists who falsified data while ignoring how the conventions of peer review, adherence to scientific method, etc. were the means of catching the false data 4) adduce phenomena in the distant past (billions of years ago) for which we do not have solid explanatory models and leap to the claim that God must have produced those phenomena (but you believe in God already on other grounds) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts