DELAWARE WATCH
Actually, the proponents of intelligent design don't rely on any failures of evolution. As far as they're concerned, intelligent design applies even when the evidence supports evolution.
Intelligent design is non-scientific in that it does not put forward any hypothesis than can be confirmed or refuted by evidence.
I don't believe I indicated that that they "rely" on gaps for ID. But there is no question that it is one of many arguments many IDiacs employ to support ID. See "God of the Gaps" here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Int...t_Design_Theory
Dana,
It was bound to happen - we finally have an issue we agree upon.
I never blog on this topic because it is a sure loser; you cannot convert an ID'er (here's a great post on this).
Tommywonk's comment that "Intelligent design is non-scientific in that it does not put forward any hypothesis than can be confirmed or refuted by evidence" is critical.
Stating this comment another way, evolution can be refuted if God appears on earth and tells us he did it as a test of our faith. Not a likely scenario, but an obvious one.
Conversely, can an ID'er present a scenario (however unlikely) that would refute their theory? I haven't heard it.
- Buzz
Science is as science does. Teach science in biology class...."refutable" or testable being an aspect of "scientific theory"....and teach ID in philosophy class, please.
Dana,
For some reason, your goldfish joke reminded me of my favorite Pope joke:
The Pope is sitting in an airplane seat doing a crossword puzzle and he lets out a sigh. The gentleman sitting next to him leans over and says, "Is there anything I can help you with, your Holiness?" The Pope scratches his head and says, "I am looking for a 4-letter word for "Woman," and the last 3-letters are U-N-T." After a moment's thought, the gentleman smiles and says, "You need an "A" the word is A-U-N-T Aunt." The Pope flushes and says, "You're right, do you have an eraser?"
See you in Hell.
Commenting by HaloScan
