[My2Cents]

This will be good. :-)

[RFC_Gal]

Krust Krab Pizza Placeholder

[MineralMan]

Science is not a popularity contest. The scientific method does not include the use of polls.

[ArGee]

#1 By remaining completely ignorant about ID while knocking down strawman versions of the theory. – Whether due to intellectual snobbery or intellectual laziness, too many critics of ID never bother to understand what the term means, much less learn the general tenets of the theory. Instead, they knock down a strawman version of ID that they have gleaned from other, equally ill-informed, critics. The belligerent or paranoid advocates of ID will assume that the misrepresentation is due to dishonesty or a conspiracy by “Darwinists.” But even those who are more charitable will agree that when a critic misrepresents the theory, it undermines their own credibility.

Even though I don't believe Darwinian processes explain biodiversity I know who pioneered that approach - and it wasn't the Darwinists.

Shalom.

[js1138]

You'd think with all this help, ID would be able to accomplish some actual science, or at least describe the kind of research they would do if they got the chance.

You'd think someone in the ID movement would put forth a testable hypothesis about when and where ID intervention has taken place and what specifically was done. Which species, for example were engineered and which are just variations on a "kind."

You'd think they would propose some physical mechanism that limits the variations on kinds. A mechanism that could be tested.

[kevkrom]

Popcorn? Check.

Binoculars? Check.

Full-body flame-proof asbestos suit? Check.

*** engaging lurk mode ***

[Rio]

Good stuff. Let us know when Part 2 shows up...

[My2Cents]

#11 -- Their arrogance. Every other scientific theory invites critical analysis, but Darwinism enforces a united front against criticism or questions about its validity. We're told "Evolution is a fact!...it happened...End of discussion...and if you think otherwise you're a ignorant religious cracker." Darwinism resists adaptation (ironic, no?). And it does this because it really isn't a scientific theory in the sense that Clerk Maxwell's work on the electromagnetic field is a theory, because it's conclusions can't be tested through observation or experimentation. It isn't a theory, but a philosophy, held-onto with religious fervency.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

FR could have poll to see how many freepers are IDers or Macroevolutionists (yes, macroevolutionists). Either there are a lot more macroevolutionists, or they are to ones more willing to post.

[Sofa King]

"#1 By remaining completely ignorant about ID while knocking down strawman versions of the theory."

How can you knock down a strawman of a theory that's never been consistently specified beyond "Not God *wink* *wink* did it"?

[Conservative Texan Mom]

When I'm finished horseback riding placemarker.

[wolfcreek]

Darwin was wrong. It was the Alantians that brought man to this planet.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Ping for interest. I always like your comments.

[hawkaw]

One does not use polls in science.

Scientific theories are based on observations in nature and/or observations of experiments in the lab. Then conclusions are drawn up from the observations. Then others do peer reviews of the work and of course further observations are done by other scientists to either uphold or demolish the scientific theory.

That's how science operates.

[Skooz]

You could just post: "ID v Evo: Discuss" and get the exact same responses.

These threads never discuss what is actually in the article. It's just the same people posting the same things until the next crevo thread pops up. Then, they do it again.

Rinse, repeat.

[ml1954]

If the IDers conclude that some phenomena is the product of ID, does that mean they are opposed to any further research to discover a natural explanation for this phenomena?

[GiovannaNicoletta]

bookmark

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

In fact, opinion polls show that fewer people are willing to accept the idea that human beings developed from earlier species than they were just ten years ago.

And the relevance of opinion polls to science is . . . ?