RE: [asa] FYI: Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of

From: Alexanian, Moorad <>
Date: Mon Aug 20 2007 - 16:16:38 EDT

The very same points you make against ID can be similarly be made against evolutionary theory. Just as design is an "observation of fact", some may say that evolutionary theory is also an observation of fact. However, neither observation of fact can be incorporated into a theory in order to make predications. In fact, the observation of design is more palpable and real than the "observation" of common descent. The former is an obvious observation of fact whereas the latter is a very tenuous inference from presently existing facts.




From: PvM []
Sent: Mon 8/20/2007 1:29 PM
To: Alexanian, Moorad
Cc: James Mahaffy;
Subject: Re: [asa] FYI: Arrogance, dogma and why science - not faith - is the new enemy of

ID's scientific vacuity is a simple fact. Since ID refuses to add a
foundation which would have to be inevitably theological, ID remains
scientifically irrelevant.
That ID proponents do not do good science may be related to ID's
scientific vacuity but again it mostly is an observation of fact.

ID's status and the status of research by ID'ers also does not depend
on the status of other areas of science.

surely you understand this?

On 8/20/07, Alexanian, Moorad <> wrote:
> You are constantly harping on ID proponents for not doing good science. I ask you what good science is being doing by proponents of evolutionary theory. By that, I am not accepting as an answer, say, a biologist who is doing solid biology and is a proponent of evolutionary theory.


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Aug 20 16:20:06 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Aug 20 2007 - 16:20:06 EDT