Re: The scientific vacuity of Intelligent Design

From: <Dawsonzhu@aol.com>
Date: Mon Nov 28 2005 - 03:07:32 EST

Cornelius Hunter wrote:

> Wayne:
>
> > Even in the best circumstances, ID could only say that an intelligent
> > agent interacted with the world at a particular time. Yet even this
> > suggests something of the nature in which God interacts with the
> > world. For one, it suggests that God feels compelled to leave his
> > "Intel inside" stamp on every product made by heaven. What if ID
> > cannot find any evidence of this "Intel inside". Shall we burn our
> > Bibles and change our allegiance to infidels.org? I mean this seriously.
> > What if you don't find anything? Is it even remotely possible that the
> > theology could be wrong?
> >
> > By Grace alone we proceed,
> > Wayne
>
> This is a mischaracterization of ID. There is no such theology.
>
>

I cannot imagine how you have worded your definition then. Will you be
satisfied that someone claims that "intelligence" was the result of
waste left behind by some teenage aliens on a joy ride in a stolen
spaceship? Where is the line drawn?

Even if we grant the supernatural as fact instead of faith, it does not mean
we can prove it scientifically. It would depend on how the supernatural
intellegent agent interacts with the world. Again, ID is saying something
about how that interaction is __expected__ to happen. What if you're wrong?
Received on Mon Nov 28 03:09:21 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Nov 28 2005 - 03:09:23 EST