Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fester Chugabrew
Do you believe science by definition is incapable of comprehending evidence for intelligent design?

No.

If not, what kind of evidence would be acceptable?

The presence of a designer would be a good start.

1,262 posted on 05/27/2005 8:03:01 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1258 | View Replies ]


To: AntiGuv
The presence of a designer would be a good start.

So, when you see an automobile, you need to see the person who designed it in order to have suitable evidence it was designed?

1,266 posted on 05/27/2005 8:07:47 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1262 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
The presence of a designer would be a good start.

Misses the mark IMO. What is required is a theory of design that meets scientific criteria. If you cannot, from the theory, say that when A is observed we will also observe B (perhaps with a given probability), then it is not a scientific theory.

ID does not meet this criterion. But science does employ other theories of design. If fact I would say that such theories are routinely employed, in archeology for example.

1,292 posted on 05/27/2005 8:54:15 AM PDT by edsheppa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1262 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson