Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Frumious Bandersnatch
the more I looked at it, the more I realized that there is no experimental way that we can prove the falsity of ID and the truth of random chance in evolutionary theory. It just won't fadge since everything is done by ID.

Fadges? We don't need no stinking fadges!

If you truly believe your statement above "there is no experimental way that we can prove the falsity of ID ... ," then you have to admit that ID is not a scientific theory. Every scientific theory must be capable of falsification ... or it isn't a scientific theory. There is no middle ground here. (Random chance is a factor, not the factor, by the way).

848 posted on 04/02/2002 6:51:12 AM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 844 | View Replies ]


To: Gumlegs
Fadges? We don't need no stinking fadges!

Would fudge work (yum)?

you have to admit that ID is not a scientific theory. Every scientific theory must be capable of falsification ... or it isn't a scientific theory. There is no middle ground here. (Random chance is a factor, not the factor, by the way).

In that case the "random chance" underpinnings of classical evolution are also in trouble, because you can't prove that either.  As far at the flipping the coin example that you used earlier, I can flip a coin and guarantee with a high degree of accuracy what it will be before I even see it.  In fact, any magician worth his salt can do that easily.  Because we cannot understand all the factors involved in a "fair flip" doesn't mean that it is truly random.

But I think of it less a theory than a theorem.  I never said that ID was true.  I just stated that it is not false.  Another two points: How do you know that random chance is a factor (since all experimentation and inductive logic making conclusions are themselves the product if ID) and just how random is random chance?

Every classical and neo-classical theory on evolution that I've seen assumes random chance at its heart, although many deny this.  The core argument is not how life may or may not change, but how life started.  If evolutionists admit that the start of life was due to anything other than to total random chance, they are admitting to an ID element.  If ID is an element to evolution, then random chance only appears random.
849 posted on 04/02/2002 7:30:02 AM PST by Frumious Bandersnatch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 848 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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