Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fester Chugabrew
You're bantering semantics. ID does not rise to the level of a science; even its proponents admit this.

By your lights we should have to prove astrology or necromancy are not sciences, otherwise they should be taught in science class.

406 posted on 01/04/2006 8:04:34 AM PST by Junior (Identical fecal matter, alternate diurnal period)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies ]


To: Junior
You're bantering semantics.

The assertion has been made that ID "is not science." By your own admission, this is a statement that cannot be proven since it is a negative. That means it must be left as an open question. Don't tell me about bantering sematics. The logic and meaning are clear as a bell.

To define science as only capable of treating "natural" phenomena is to set up a non-scientific standard and invite semantic bantering. What is the scientific definition of "natural?"

411 posted on 01/04/2006 8:25:30 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson