Didn't you previously say that the only way to distinguish design from non-design was to see the designer in action? If seeing the designer in...
Yes, and they can also lead us to the truth. Your attitude, if applied consistently throughout science, would be the end of the whole enterprise....
What counts as useful? Proving design? Science has provided no methodology that can distinguish between design and non-design in an experimentally...
What specific and distinguishing empirical predictions does the blind watchmaker hypothesis make that would not turn out true in the null hypothesis?
Dembski has always been upfront that he believes the designer to be God. He merely claims that this can't be established via the logic of ID.
Yeah, right. When you're losing an argument play the religion card. As if your metaphysics don't play an important part in how you interprete the...
You are not paying attention. Molecular machines are not chemical processes they are literal machines! One more time: This peer-reviewed...
If you ask me what would cause me to merely suspect design I would point to certain aspects of biotic reality that look much more like products of...
Michael Polanyi once wrote: Life itself is machine-dependent. Under the sub-heading "The machinery of life" an article in Physics Today...
I agree and I'm not aware of any ID scientist that equates any chemical process to an engine. What they equate to an engine are things the...
TraderNik, Arguments should be judged on their merits regardless of the source. If you can't do that then get off this thread.
And that's exactly how design theorists work. Certain clues cause them to tentatively conclude something may be designed and then they follow up...
If someone thinks design has been established or proven simply because it looks that way to them, they have obviously jumped the gun. But there is...
I asked you what you would count as evidence for design not what you would count as absolute proof of design. Let me put it this way: what...
What would you count as evidence for design?
D2.0 wrote: Wrong. Just because the majority of ID proponents are Christian it doesn't necessarily follow that ID is based primarily on...
Stu wrote: Pure bunk. ID has nothing whatsoever to do with creationism. ID is not based on the Bible, does not invoke the supernatural, and is...
Stu wrote: Nonsense. ID doesn't invoke an omnipotent Creator, is not based on the Genesis account and isn't anti-evolution.
Stu wrote: My ID views go above and beyond the Discovery Institute. I merely quote them when they are being misrepresented. Letting them...
Stu wrote: It is absolutely false that Gonzalez had no grant funding. Besides, outside research funding is not a published criterion for...
Separate names with a comma.