“Why does ID need ‘science’ to proclaim that life is too complex to investigate further?”
I have followed this debate for over 30 years. In all that time I have never heard anyone on either side, evolutionist or creationist, proclaim that life was too complex to investigate further.
You are fully aware of that fact yet you posted the above lie to further an agenda. Sounds exactly like a deranged zealot with plenty of angst to me.
“In all that time I have never heard anyone on either side, evolutionist or creationist, proclaim that life was too complex to investigate further.”
A cornerstone of ID is the concept of “irreducible complexity”. To paraphrase: we can’t figure out how it got here, so we’ll just say that that’s the way it was designed.
Did you miss that?
It has been said on this forum, Leonard. That the complexity of biological systems refute any proposed naturalistic explanation and that creation could be the only logical assumption. Buck was not lying.