Replies

I argue to be argumentative?

So far you have responded to almost EVERY ONE of my posts, because for some odd reason, you ACTUALLY think that ID is science. When any scientist would look at it, and say. no evidence, no predictons, no nothing.

It is nonfalsifiable because god is used as it's MAIN causation. God is not scientific, and never has been.

Any theory that says "goddidit" is by definition, NON FALSIFIABLE. because you cannot prove nor disprove the existince of god.

Prove that god exists scientifically, then we can talk about god being used as a causation, but you can't.

Hint: god is a religious concept, there are NO facts to back up that god exists, it is a matter of faith, it is NOT scientific.

Again, ID has it's place, it is called philosophy religion, just as a lot of cosmological theories are more philisophical then they are scientific.

I argue to be argumentative? damn, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

So far you have responded to almost EVERY ONE of my posts, because for some odd reason, you ACTUALLY think that ID is science. When any scientist would look at it, and say. no evidence, no predictons, no nothing.

This is the crap I am talking about. Despite the fact that I have repeated many times I am not arguing for ID – you claim I think ID is science. These are your knee-jerk slogans and you use them no matter how inapplicable.

From my limited study of intelligent design, there are many theories that fall into the category of ID. You argue as if there is only one ID theory.