Replies

. . . evolutionary biology is science . . .

It is until it starts making statements to the exclusion of, or against intelligent design. When faced with the idea that organized matter performing specific functions MIGHT be best explained by intelligent design, evolutionists cannot shut their mouths, even though they have nothing better to offer. Whatever they decide to offer as a better explanation, if ever such a thing should happen, it will not be science either.

And to the extent they posit scenarios that involve unobserved, undocumented events, they also depart from empirical science and step into the void of reasonable conjecture based upon their own a priori assumptions, such as uniformitarianism.

" It is until it starts making statements to the exclusion of, or against intelligent design."

Evolutionary biology has nothing to say about ID, because ID isn't science.

"Whatever they decide to offer as a better explanation, if ever such a thing should happen, it will not be science either."

Evolutionary biology and abiogensis IS a better explanation. ID explains nothing. It says *we don't know how this happened, so God did it, stop looking!!*.

"And to the extent they posit scenarios that involve unobserved, undocumented events, they also depart from empirical science and step into the void of reasonable conjecture based upon their own a priori assumptions, such as uniformitarianism."

Uniforamitarianism posits observed, documented events and extrapolates that into the past. ID posits unobserved, undocumented, and untestable causes and says there is no need to look any further. It's heuristically worthless.