It may be an excellent post, but it ignores a rather important issue — whether Shapiro’s “guiding intelligence” is a natural process that could be emulated in a computer, or whether common descent requires occasional pit stops for supernatural service.
Cdesign proponentsists may claim not to be creationists, but Rush Limbaugh is right. ID is a mask for suppernaturalism. Shapiro does not invoke any supernatural causes, and he criticises Behe for unnecessarily bringing religion into science.
[[but Rush Limbaugh is right. ID is a mask for suppernaturalism.]]
Good golly- Tiem and time agian it has been shown ID is no such thing- it is a science that clearly indicates intelligent design- period- it makes no claim about who or what the itnelligence is- Heck soem ID proponents feel that nature itself is the intellgience and have conducted studies to try to determine IF nature is capable of the itnellgience seen in the design (to no avail I might add)- so tell me JS- how is ID a supernaturalism then if some proponents who are groudned in and vested in ID don’t even believe in God but feel Nature is hte intellgience?
[[Shapiro does not invoke any supernatural causes, and he criticises Behe for unnecessarily bringing religion into science.]]
IF this is what Shapiro does then he too has shown himself UNObjective and thus not scientific as He’s a priori already ruled out any other explanations other than naturalism or whatev3r he believes.
ID doesn’t ‘bring religion into science’- it makes no mention of religion nor of the itnellgience- all it does- and quite validly so, is show enough evidnece to show that nature could not have created IC and that another explanation is necessary.
As I’ve said repeatedly- when someone finds 1000’s of examples of IC- it is unscientific to suggest that ONLY Naturalism can be the cause ESPECIALLY when they not only have zero evidence to support htis AND when a natural process MUST include a supernatural process itself to overcome the biological impossibilities of hte supposed natural process. So please- enopugh with hte insinuations that ID isn’t ‘science because it presents evidence that an intelligence must be invovled in IC because your naturalism MUST also appeal soem kind of supernaturalism as well if it is to be true.