LOL! I love how scientific-illiterates can call ID "garbage," when there are Ph.D-level working scientists who *do* consider it science.
100
That wouldn't include Michael Behe, who says that if you want to consider ID science, you have to expand the definition of science to include things like astrology.
And better not try the 'scientific illiterate' schtick on me, laddie. BTW, I'd don't think you've ever told us where you got your Ph.D..
No more than 5-10.
Harvey started off with an admittedly tough question for Minnich: “are there objective, quantitative measures for design?” This is a hard question for Minnich to answer because Minnich’s arguments were analogical. But that doesn’t mean the evidence for ID couldn’t be there, and Minnich replied that the argument is more intuitive than quantitative. Other ID proponents (like Dembski) might make more quantitative arguments, but Minnich’s arguments are more analogical in nature.
To paraphrase Minnich -- "I don't have any evidence for ID, and I don't know of any methodology for locating any evidence for ID. But that doesn't mean the evidence for ID couldn't be there. Somewhere. Maybe Dembski has some."
Please inform us as to what the Theory of Intelligent Design is, what that theory can be used to predict, and how it is testable and falsifiable.
Then I'll consider it science, along with 99% of the rest of the scientific community.
It *is* garbage, and you sort of "forgot" to mention the vast numbers (an overwhelming majority) of very *non*illiterate scientists who agree on that point.
Why would you want to be grossly dishonest like that?
Please respond.
when there are Ph.D-level working scientists who *do* consider it science.
Yeah, about ten at the very most (out of millions of working scientists), who are raking in the cash selling their mass-market books on the subject to the AECreationists hungry for some sort of "validation". Heck, I've been tempted to do the same myself, except *I* have too many ethics.
Did you have some sort of actual point to make?
Scientific illiterates? On what do you base that misrepresentation?