Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
The far simpler theory has nothing to do with God. You should consider the possibility that those who reject ID do so because the arguments you present, as well as those presented by Behe and Dembski, are flawed.I dont' think that's the answer either, though a logical possibility.The cases for ID and evolution both depend critically on inference: in the case of ID, it is the inference of design from an arrangement of parts that outside biology demand a design inference. For evolution, the inference is in the accumulation of small changes (which can be observed) into big changes.Why does one seem to be the more rational inference to some, while others go with another choice?Your implication that supporters of evolution are the only ones using evidence and reason to develop a worldview, while ID supporters fudge the facts to provide a placebo for their faith would be highly insulting to some people. If in fact that's what you're implying.Bryan
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |