[[Do you see any evidence that science will, or needs to turn to, magic, superstition, wishful thinking, old wives tales, folklore, what the stars foretell and what the neighbors think, omens, public opinion, astromancy, spells, Ouija boards, anecdotes, Da Vinci codes, tarot cards, sorcery, seances, sore bunions, black cats, divine revelation, table tipping, witch doctors, crystals and crystal balls, numerology, divination, faith healing, miracles, palm reading, the unguessable verdict of history, magic tea leaves, new age mumbo-jumbo, hoodoo, voodoo and all that other weird stuff?]]
No- I see evidence that shoudl cause science to turn FROM magic, superstition, wishful thinking, old wives tales, folklore, what the stars foretell and what the neighbors think, omens, public opinion, astromancy, spells, Ouija boards, anecdotes, Da Vinci codes, tarot cards, sorcery, seances, sore bunions, black cats, divine revelation, table tipping, witch doctors, crystals and crystal balls, numerology, divination, faith healing, miracles, palm reading, the unguessable verdict of history, magic tea leaves, new age mumbo-jumbo, hoodoo, voodoo and all that other weird stuff?
Psssst- ID doesn’t rely on ANY of those- but nice try- trying to dishonestly paint the science as soemthign it isn’t- Is dishonesty the only weapon you have to defend your relgious beleif about life with? Seriously- is it? Every post you make you seriously misrepresent, mistate, and mislead people into thinking somethign that simply isn not true- you present your ready made comments time and time again- time and time again they are soundly refuted and exposed for thje dishonest posts that they are, and yet you continue to present them as though nothing had ever been said before in regards to them. It’s liek listening to a broken record.
Tell me Coyote- IF Macroevolution is worng, then what? Shoudldn’t there be another method proposed and excplored? What exactly is science to you? is Macroevolution the ONLY criteria used when jidging what is and what isn’t science? Who died and made Macroevolution the only criteria for science and for life? When was Macroevolution crowned the only scinetific possibility? I must havem issed that ceremony- What will you do when more and more evidence of design shows intelligent causation? and when more and more serious dead ends to Macroevolution are exposed? ? Just curious to know how many impossiblities it would take to convince you that Macroevolution nver happend? Because quite frankly, there are a lot of serious impossiblities as it stands, yet, apparently, if there’s a twinkle of possiblities- say soemthign liek 10 to hte 350’th power possibility for just ONE single incident, let alone hte trillions of incidents needed for the species we know about today, then apparently, ‘it could have hsppened’? Whos practicing religious theology again?
You've never told us your evidence and we are still waiting. Better yet, lets assume life is intelligently designed. Then how was life constructed based on these intelligent designs? A contractor is needed to construct what an architect has imagined. So how do we go from the plans to a living thing? Where's the evidence of that? How did the designer bring together the constituents of living things? That's another big hole in ID.