[doc30]

ID cannot answer the questions it asks of science. Evolution is theory built upon evidence. ID is religious speculation that denies what we know about the world via science. It doesn't even answer what the evidence is of a designer, nor the origins of that designer, not how this designer can physically manipulate the world around us without leaving a footpring behind. Evolution does have some intersting and importnat quersitons about specific things, but that is healthy scientific debate, not a retreat from where clear evidence leads. The author of the article needs to stop trying to change the meaning of science to hit his own agenda.

[curtisgardner]

Evolution is theory built upon evidence.

What evidence would that be?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Evolution is theory built upon evidence.

That evidence is that all life, both flora and fauna, has DNA. DNA is the singularity of all life.

The “Big Bang” theory rests upon the assumption of a singularity, a point where all matter was concentrated to initiate the event.

Both the “Big Bang” and evolution theories are really inadvertent admissions by the scientific community that the universe and life are immaculate conceptions.

Stuff that in your pipe and smoke it...

[LiteKeeper]

the meaning of science

What meaning would that be?

[RobbyS]

ID is basically an effort to show that the meachisms advanced by evolutionosts do not, in fact, explain as much as is claimed by iys most devout believers. Natural slection, as laid out by Darwin in Origin of Species, certain does not. That is why the present theory is known as neo-darwin. Overzealous application of the theory has led to some unfortunate conconclusions, such as Huxley's conclusion that we are close kin to apes and monkeys. From that was inferred that there is a close connection between other primates and "lower"--unevolved-- forms of humans who were identified with "primitive" human beings. This matter has NOT been settled, despite the egalitarianism of Julian Huxley et al.