Replies

I’m reading a lot about Creationists and not about Intelligent Design in these reviews.

I guess I’m just amazed that we slip so easily into the Global Warming debate with facts, yet when someone asks a question about intelligent design, it becomes very hostile.

The people that take the evolution theory side have no problem with “beings” from another planet “seeding” the Earth, but have a problem with Our Lord “seeding” it.

Isn’t that strange?

I’m reading a lot about Creationists and not about Intelligent Design in these reviews.

The problem is that ID has not been made a separate field, with ongoing research and a body of competing hypotheses used to make and test predictions. ID is creationism with the serial numbers filed off in an attempt to fool school boards and courts.

The evidence is there in the Wedge Strategy:

We are building on this momentum, broadening the wedge with a positive scientific alternative to materialistic scientific theories, which has come to be called the theory of intelligent design (ID). Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions. ...
Governing Goals
* To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
* To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God.

When you start off with this beginning, it is no wonder that ID is not taken seriously by science. It is religion, not science.

The people that take the evolution theory side have no problem with “beings” from another planet “seeding” the Earth, but have a problem with Our Lord “seeding” it. Isn’t that strange?

You are confusing science with religion. The former requires evidence, while the latter relies on belief and revelation.

By the way, there is no credible evidence for “'beings' from another planet 'seeding' the Earth."

“The people that take the evolution theory side have no problem with “beings” from another planet “seeding” the Earth, but have a problem with Our Lord “seeding” it.” [excerpt]

Thats because Dawkins' god-aliens are themselves a product of natural processes and the feasibility of their evolution from non-living matter is explained by their existence in yet undiscovered conditions on an unknown planet, whose environmental conditions are not found on earth.

Essentially, Dawkins has conceded that life evolving from non-living matter here on earth is not feasible.

The only explanation that he can then give without compromising his a priori belief in evolution is that the first evolution occurred on another planet.

By making this statement, he can shed the burden of proof, because the planet in question is unknown and probably impossible to reach in his lifetime, and therefore he cannot be expected to verify his claims.

Not exactly what I call science.