Replies

I simply think the ToE has too many 'gaps' to be accepted as the truth; and there are certainly enough of them that it is not unreasonable to point out that they exist.

I am also honest enough to admit that I believe in ID/creation and don't see that great a difference between the two, other than that those who believe in creation are more likely to be religious, with Christianity being a significant one.

I am also honest enough to admit that believe in ID/creation requires an element of faith as well; but there is substantial evidence for it.

On the other hand, I would also say that a belief in the ToE also requires a degree of faith. If there are 'gaps' in the ToE, some faith must be present.

It's my personal opinion that belief in evolution requires more faith than in ID/creation, but I can see where those on the evolution side might think the opposite.

I don't think I've been evasive about ID/creation. I've never said that you can prove, in a positive sense, that id is true. My arguments have simply been that the evidence doesn't support evolution, and especially macro-evolution. I have never had a problem with natural selection, and I don't think any intelligent IDer does.

I have never defended the use of actual numbers in proclaiming the improbability of evolution. While I think the odds against evolution are extraordinarily high, I don't see how the proponents of those numbers can reach them without considerable speculation in the same way I think evolutionists have to resort to mind-boggling speculation to explain away problems with evolution.

You and I obviously disagree in the evolution v. ID/creation debate, I don't think it would be fair to say I am being intellectually dishonest.