[Fester Chugabrew]

We are not free to choose subjective evidence and still be scientific.

You switched the terms. I said it is the observer that is subjective by nature, not the evidence. Do you know the difference?

The presence of organized matter that behaves according to predictable laws is objective evidence for intelligent design, because intelligent design by definition entails organizing matter along with the parameters by which it will be governed. Where is your objective evidence that man began as a simple creature and progressed from there? Can you present objective evidence that entails not the slightest amount of inference or subjective notions? No.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I said it is the observer that is subjective by nature, not the evidence. Do you know the difference?"

Yes, I do. Do you? We arrive at objective evidence by subjecting the evidence to testing and repeatability.

" The presence of organized matter that behaves according to predictable laws is objective evidence for intelligent design."

Not what you said before.

"Where is your objective evidence that man began as a simple creature and progressed from there?"

The entire fossil record. The record in our genes. Our morphology. Biogeopgraphical studies. The evidence is ENORMOUS. And it is objective.

"Can you present objective evidence that entails not the slightest amount of inference or subjective notions? No."

Inference is not necessarily subjective. So your dichotomy is false.

"Intelligent design is an objective reality that governs all of science."

Not what you said before. You said that it was SUBJECTIVE reasons that tilted the scales to ID over not ID.

"How does admitting the existence of subjectivity equate with "embracing" it as "not problematic in the least?"

Because you said that you chose ID for subjective reasons. You said (then, anyway) that the choice was not objective.


"It's obviously been a problem with you, because you cannot objectively understand any connection between intelligent design and organized matter."

Nor can Fester1, your other self who said that it wasn't objective reasons that tilts the scales to ID.

Now, before you continue, please have that debate with yourself. Don't come back until you can all keep your positions straight.