Re: [asa] The Myth of the Rejected ID Paper

From: PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Jul 08 2008 - 00:02:12 EDT

On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:18 PM, Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> Hi Pim,
>
> Regarding the claim re testability in the following;
>
>> "The National Academy of Sciences in 1999 stated "Creationism,
>> intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in
>> the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not
>> testable by the methods of science."
>
> It's well-worn observation in debates over YECism that one cannot, at one
> and the same time, claim that a position is "scientifically unfalsifiable"
> and also that it is "scientifically false".

Of course you can. ID is based on the claim that 'X cannot be
explained by evolutionary theory' which can be shown to be false, and
yet the concept of ID, that of a supernatural designer is untestable.

Simple application of logic. You see, ID and YEC conflate two
different claims, one of a young earth or insufficiencies of natural
laws which can be shown to be false and one of a supernatural designer
which remains untestable.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jul 8 00:02:45 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jul 08 2008 - 00:02:45 EDT