CureZone   Log On   Join   Happy New Year 2025
Re: Kitzmiller v Dover
 
traderdrew Views: 1,049
Published: 18 y
 
This is a reply to # 885,002

Re: Kitzmiller v Dover


IDs star witness Behe admitted that for ID to be considered as science, the definition would have to be stretched so much it would also include other pseudosciences like astrology, alchemy, phrenology, palmistry, and more.

Hi Corinthian,

Why do you have that figure on your profile?  I had the impression you are a guy.  Anyway, I can understand this because we don't scientifically know the intentions of an intelligent designer.  However, we don't have to guess what his intentions are.  I think all we have to do is look for the results and sort of reverse engineer them.

(3) ID’s negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community”.

Why does inquiry have do be desribed as negative?  I would expect evolutionists to attempt to refute them.  This to me is the same reason why we have debate forums here on curezone although the debate threads don't ususally work that way.

 

Share


 
Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend
Alert Moderators
Report Spam or bad message  Alert Moderators on This GOOD Message

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


 

Donate to CureZone


CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with https://www.netatlantic.com


Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2025  www.curezone.org

0.187 sec, (1)