evopeach
Posts: 248
Joined: July 2005
|
Link,
You want me to read a propaganda piece written in part by Barbara Forrester , the lead witness, against Dover as an objective convincing analysis.
Most people would agree that the way you know when a trial is decided is when its over and the verdict is rendered.
I see it as a separation of church and state issue and since the supreme court has agreed that the teaching of altenative scientific theories is acceptable the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that ID is not scientific.
The detection of design like Mt. Rushmore or the monoliths on Easter Island are pretty comprehensible by average people.
The question seems to be is there any impact on science by the detection of design or is it ... so what.
In ETSI the entire idea was to detect the difference between random white or colored noise and a correlated signal, a code, a message. If such a message was detected and decoded would it have an impact on science in the USA?
1) We would act on the message because it would likely be some universally important scientific information.
2) We would approach additional messages with a scientifically schooled filtering scheme to enhance further understanding, tightly focused.
So the detection of design would be a scientific endeaver
which would very likely have impact on science itself.
If the messages were repeated over and over and when decoded was universally agreed to say......."In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.." would that make all of the work performed to get to that point a waste of time and unscientific?
|
