Replies

As usual; I'm only in and out of this absurd thread, however:

"an anti-evolution concept known as intelligent design..."

Is inaccurate, overly defensive, and quite illuminating.

ID does not say 'there is no evolution'.
It says 'Darwin's theory of origins (and variations) of (and between) species does not manage to explain the origins of life'.

What really, really, disturbs me is that 'science' seems on the verge of jumping off a cliff in order to 'discover' what actually did (per them) generate life...
...anyone for outer space seedlings?
...primordial glop with a lightening booster?
...gamma rays and one lonely but willing carbon based mutant?
...whatever...

Actually any Biologist would tell you that...

"Darwin's theory of origins (and variations) of (and between) species does not manage to explain the origins of life".

I think I've heard it explained about a hundred times on this board already that evolution through natural selection ASSUMES life, it doesn't explain the creation of it (just as the theory of gravity ASSUMES mass it doesn't explain the creation of it).

The subject of the origins of life is called Abiogenesis, and there are only a scant few papers on the subject. It is really Abiogenesis, not Evolution, where 'Intelligent' Design has a target rich environment. Evolution is observed just as Darwin predicted in numerous experiments, with additional confirmation from DNA comparison, and the fossil record. It is Abiogenesis that is actually the notion at the heart of most Creationists' chagrin, and it is the most attractive target for a pseudo-scientific assault like 'Intelligent' Design.

The only reason that 'Intelligent' Design doesn't go after Abiogenesis, where it might actually have an argument, rather than Evolution; is that there are MILLIONS to be made attacking Evolution, and all the people who would give them money to do so seem to be under the impression that the Evolution IS Abiogenesis.