As Fuller has explained, it is merely a philosophical commitment to so-called methodological naturalism, adopted as a convention by the bulk of the scientific community, which bars reference to the possibility of supernatural causation, again, at least so far as such causation is currently regarded as supernatural. Even Pennock agrees that philosophers of science, those who have examined these matters in detail, do not agree as to the viability or benefits of this so-called methodological commitment.Can any of you creationists show me ONE breakthrough theory in science that has EVER been successful, that relied on the existence of the supernatural???Moreover, the evidence shows that this philosophical, nonscientific commitment is in no way an essential feature of scientific inquiry. One should be reluctant, truly loathed to impose as a matter of federal law a current convention of the scientific community when the consequences would be to greatly harm scientific progress, at least if the history of science can shed any light on its future. But that would be the practical effect of accepting the artificially narrow view of science espoused by the plaintiffs' experts.
It's interesting to see that Gillen thinks Fuller, with his postmodernist defense of ID, was their only expert witness worth mentioning.
The trend in science to date has certainly been away from any sort of "The gods are angry" explanation and toward mechanistic ("A will inevitably and repeatably cause B") ones.
You're overlooking the contribution to Western Civilization made by the invention of the chastity belt.
Integrated circuits run on magic smoke. This is proven by the fact that if you see the smoke escaping, the chip stops working.
Every breakthrough in science is the result of a mind, of intelligence operating on a problem. The operation of the mind lies beyond the reach of any materialist explanation for it.
Quantum theory.
A term used with respect to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox, first described by Einstein and his co-authors Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen in 1935.
Quantum mechanics makes an unusual prediction that although two entangled particles may be light-years apart, they seem to have the uncanny ability to affect one another instantaneously. If the two particles have a total spin of zero, for instance, an observer measuring the first particle's spin will instantly cause a so-called "collapse of the wave function," yielding a precise measurement of the second particle's spin. This information about the second particle becomes available to the observer far faster than the speed of light should allow.
Einstein challenged this prediction, which seemed to violate his own strict limits on the speed of information travel. Undefined "hidden variables" must be at work, Einstein claimed, in order for information about the second particle to become available instantaneously to an observer light-years away. Einstein called the effect 'spooky action at a distance' and attributed it to hidden variables.
In 1964, British physicist John Bell later disproved the notion that hidden variables affect interactions between particles with his well-known Bell's inequalities.
These enjoyed great commercial success.