[[Gradations of confidence according to different methodologies, for different prospective goals.]]
Forensics is equally accepted by Christians for both criminal cases and for science investigations- What Miller was asserting went WAY beyond forensic evidnece, and was nothign short of intelligently designing a ‘natural evolution’ for blood clotting- it was nothign more than a ‘just so’ story rife with if’s but’s and coulda’s. His opening ‘explanation’ demanded a duplication take place, AND that it be Damaged/altered in a very specific manner before hte process could even get started, THEN, he demands that a switch take place ensuring that the cell can turn on ‘at some future point’ in not the one singular organ it was intended to, but now, in two organs so as to facilitate further manipulations and mutations further down hte line in his wild scenario- that wasn’t science- that was spinning a fairy tale- plain and simple-
Miller defeated his own argument himself, apparenlty without even recognizing htat he had done so- He claims blood clotting coudl evolve naturally to a more complex system, then goes on to describe an intelligently DESIGNED network of circumstances that all must have happened in happy succession while cells were being controlled and manipulated to perform duties they were never coded to do.
I only read 1/3 through the story on his site, and already it proved to be so full of intelligently designed happenstances that one really has to wonder about Miller’s motives- for they certainly aren’t scientific- but more a religious dogma- Miller didn’t present forensic evidence- He simply presented a fun bedtime story for kids- which unfortunately, gets taught to our kids in school
All I was doing was pointing out was that different disciplines have (by necessity) different evidentiary standards. I was echoing the apologist C.S. Lewis .
Cheers!