But you have many people at the Discovery Institute and other such places that do believe in a designer, and are (from what I read) steering their research as appropriate, correct? What have they come up with? What new branches of research has been opened? What new medicines have been proposed? Let's think about something here: there have been a large, LARGE amount of scientists and learned men who fervently believe in God for thousands of years, correct? That is a long time to produce "design-based" research, theories, etc. Yet, we still see nothing of that type. Why?
You have also missed an earlier point that *I* made. I'll repeat: are you suggesting that man, upon discovering God's design, could do anything with the data? Even comprehend it?
Sure- righton fella- right when they dispense with the “ID is psuedoscience” antics
If you cannopt falsify a theory, you cannot call it science. But, I am very willing to be corrected here. Just tell me how to falsify ID.
“If you cannopt falsify a theory, you cannot call it science. But, I am very willing to be corrected here. Just tell me how to falsify ID.”
Please explain to me how the modern theory of abiogenesis can be falsified. Until you do, I’ll assume that you don’t consider it “science” (never mind how much tax money is spent on it!).
I guess you weren’t yet on this thread when I posted post # 101, so I’ll copy some of it here:
Also, as I said before, the problem is not just that science hasn’t “figured it out yet,” though evolutionists would have us believe that. The problem is that the random origin of the first cell would be comparable, as Fred Hoyle put it, to having a tornado in a junkyard result in a fully assembled Boeing 747. I use a slightly different analogy. It would be comparable to having the entire text of the Gettysburg Address show up randomly on some desert sands due to random winds.
I’ve also pointed out that the entire notion of a random origin of the first cell in unfalsifiable and hence, by the very definitions used by many evolutionists, unscientific. Think about it. Explain to me how one could prove that the Gettysburg Address never appeared spontaneously on the sands of a desert.
It can only be done by probabilistic analysis, but evolutionists routinely dismiss such analyses with a wave of the hand. Hence, the modern theory of abiogenesis is “unscientific” according to the very same criterion that evolutionists claim that ID is unscientific.