Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: freedumb2003

Why is the who and the how of “no scientific currency”?


430 posted on 09/29/2009 9:24:26 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies ]


To: count-your-change

[[Why is the who and the how of “no scientific currency”?]]

The who isn’t even part of ID- the How is- and whether nature is capable of the how, or something or someone else is- Some in ID have opinions about who or what was needed, but the evidence, like any forensic science investigation, only has to show the NEED for an intelligence behind the complexity- and to show that nature is incapable of creating the complexity- the evidnece is mounting in favor of the NEED for a Designer of some sort, and the evidence is mounting against Nature being capable of such feats. Some in ID feel that nature is stil lcapable of creating intelligent Deisng and metainformation- but they have yet to provide ANY evidence to show that nature could produce either- they simply have opinions, but also cede that complexity and information could not arise on it’s own- Some, like Demski- think nature was capable of supllying hte metainformaiton- but his ‘explanation’ is really whacked- likening it to a game of Red Rover where nature simpyl ‘sends the information right over’ (apparently those that think nature is capable of such feats, think nature to be an omnipotent designer- able to foretell what is needed, and to provide info in advance to deal with problems that haven’t arisen yet)


433 posted on 09/29/2009 10:57:32 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 430 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson