“Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind.”
That one chunk of matter attracts another chunk of matter is observable fact. That its cause is “bent space” or “an exchange of particles” is theory.
Kneejerk true-believers in Darwinism love to assert that Darwinism is no longer a theory, but is as factually well established as quantum mechanics. Unfortunately for them, we never hear groups of quantum physicists asserting that quantum mechanics is no longer a theory, but is as well established a fact as Darwinian evolution.
We don’t hear them say that for good reason: they’re too smart to say something so stupid and so untrue.
Quantum mechanics is no longer merely a theory because it has been experimentally verified to fourteen decimals. Does Darwinian evolution have any observation, any experiment — ANYTHING — that remotely approaches that sort of precision?
The short answer is “No.”
The longer, more nuanced answer is “No.”
Everything in science is open to revision — Newton, Einstein, Darwin — all of it. The desire to hold one causal explanation for a set of phenomena as “unquestionably true for all time” and “established beyond all reasonable doubt for all time”, as the Darwinists want to do with their theory of random mutation plus natural selection, is unscientific.
That Darwinists also permit no questioning of their explanation by threat of force via the courts, is both unscientific and immoral.
Darwinists are not trying to protect the sanctity of science, as they claim. They are protecting a worldview that denies the existence — or even the possibility — of “Mind” in “Nature.” If they are Moderate Materialists, they will deny the existence of Mind in Physical Nature, but admit its existence in human beings (and, to a lesser extent, other animals); if they are fully consistent, Radical Materialists, they will deny the existence of Mind altogether, and will embrace some form of behaviorism in their psychological views.
Even a hardcore Darwinist like Richard Dawkins admitted in Ben Stein’s documentary “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” that humans could have been intelligently designed by, e.g., space aliens — he won’t rule out the possibility. However, for him, the space aliens themselves must have been intelligently designed by earlier space aliens, who themselves must have been intelligently designed by still earlier space aliens, etc. He balks at the infinite regress involved in the way he thinks about the process. What he objects to, even more than the infinite regress, is any sort of non-material, “supernatural” explanation for anything that might have started the process — a “prime mover” — God.
While many in the intelligent design movement believe in God, not all do; what unites them is the understanding that living things have solved certain problems to come into existence; problems that could not have been solved by any sort of random process.
Beautiful answer. Thank you.
“Darwinists” don’t stop questioning at all. The court thing is about curriculum. Intelligent design is, at best, an expose of the weaknesses of evolutionary theory. ID only offers a black box as an alternative.
Everything in science is open to revision — Newton, Einstein, Darwin — all of it. The desire to hold one causal explanation for a set of phenomena as “unquestionably true for all time” and “established beyond all reasonable doubt for all time”, as the Darwinists want to do with their theory of random mutation plus natural selection, is unscientific.
That Darwinists also permit no questioning of their explanation by threat of force via the courts, is both unscientific and immoral.
Yup...everytime the theory is questioned it resembles more cult than theory. EVERY criticism is attacked as a religious insult to science or flat out anti-science.
And there’s plenty of empirical evidence on this site alone that those that scream with their hair on fire “inquisition, theocracy and burnings at the stake” everytime someone so much as sneezes toward Darwin’s direction, (while lecturing others about what is or isn’t “real” science), the less these people know what science is or isn’t and don’t have a clue what they’re talking about.
They also show a profound ignorance of Christianity, but that’s another subject.
[[While many in the intelligent design movement believe in God, not all do; what unites them is the understanding that living things have solved certain problems to come into existence; problems that could not have been solved by any sort of random process.]]
Yup- ID’s only intent is to investigate the most probable, beyond reasonable doubt evidences- when there is both enough evidence to show an intelligence is needed, and that nature is simply incapable of causing life, then their case is one of having established a ‘most probable’ case- beyond reasonable doubt- Any forensic investigation does exactly this- establish that the evidences do NOT fit natural causations, models, and that an intelligence was needed behind hte designs discovered. Finding say 1000 intricately carved idols, a forensic scientist rules out natural causation, and investigates the DESIGN to establish a ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ explanation.
As you said, the strict science of ID is NOT concerned with who or what, only in the how- whether the objects or designs are natural, or whether an intelligent agent caused the design.
Good post. Human Evolutionists hate the fact that they believe in a descriptive science, but they want to trick you into thinking that it is an exact science. Ultimately it all boils down to an “anything but God” mentality that reeks just like the statement you quoted in your post about space aliens. In their mind, as long as God didn’t do it, they are happy. Evolution (particularly Human Evolution) is an anti-God religion.