“Science seeks to discover natural causes to provide natural explanations for what is observed in nature. However, to say that natural causes are the only causes or to dogmatically assert that everything about the material world can be explained through material causes alone are philosophical statements and not objective statements about scientific methodology.
Science makes no presuppositions about the existence or non-existence of transcendent causes. Neither does science make any presuppositions regarding the influence or effect a transcendent cause might have in the material world or the ability or inability of science, using the methods of empirical science, to detect those influences or effects. Consequently, the impossibility of disproving the existence of a transcendent cause precludes an assumption that all observable effects must be due to natural causes and only natural causes. Imposition of such an assumption can only be made on the basis of ideology and within the context of public education, raises First Amendment issues.
Evidence bearing on a scientific question must be critically examined from all sides and evaluated on the basis of scientific merit, not religious or philosophical presuppositions. While it may be true that science can only study material effects in the natural world, there are some effects that cannot be explained by the laws of physics and chemistry, chance and time alone and point to the possibility of an intervening intelligence, or, a previously undiscovered law that mimics the actions of an intervening intelligence. To rule out the possibility of an intervening intelligence can only be made on the basis of ideology, not evidence.”
http://www.nmidnet.org/articles.htm
Science is supoposed to be about OBJECTIVE observation- but macroevolution cuts objectivism off at the knees by declarign that everything MUSt have a natural origins and MUST be explained via natural processes- this is a subjective ideological religious claim, and is NOT an objective observation of the evidences
>>Science makes no presuppositions about the existence or non-existence of transcendent causes. Neither does science make any presuppositions regarding the influence or effect a transcendent cause might have in the material world or the ability or inability of science, using the methods of empirical science, to detect those influences or effects.<<
That is a non-statement. Science follows the facts in the physical world. If it leads to an ID, then he/she/it has many questions to answer.
You’re so cute. Do your mommy and daddy know you use their computer thingy late at night to pretend you are a grown-up?
Check your Dr. Pepper can — it is probably close to empty.
But it won’t.
ID is just for people who are too lazy to do real science. It boils down to “it is tooo HARD, so IDdidit.”
It amazes me you pop off so much on these threads with so little understanding of real science (not the metaphysical science you try to pass off with many words of little meaning).