Posted on 08/27/2005 9:47:18 AM PDT by Michael_Michaelangelo
There is a belief among media commentators that intelligent design is unscientific because it is unfalsifiable or untestable: no empirical evidence can count against it. Though common, this charge is demonstrably false. Of course theres no way to falsify a mere assertion that a cosmic designer exists. This much we are agreed on. But contemporary design arguments focus not on such vague claims, but on detectible evidence for design in the natural world. Therefore, the design arguments currently in play are falsifiable.
(Excerpt) Read more at discovery.org ...
That's a pretty good point. For the SETI stuff, their search for life can be justified with an ID hand-waving on top of any abiogenesis probabilities. They're in a catbird seat.
The SETI project was criticized from an abio point of view, and the scientist who did it used some probability calculations which appear to have been peer reviewed. I am looking for any peer-reviewed update of those probability calculations. That would be my starting point for acceptable material to use for purposes of public policy discussions.
"Vestigial organs prove Unintelligent Design." - mdefranc
"Does a useless seam line on an object molded from plastic proove that it too was not designed?" - RobRoy
Seams unintelligent.
And why do men have nipples.
8^>
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.