Leftfield
Posts: 107
Joined: Nov. 2006
|
Dopes on parade:
Commenting on the latest anti methodological naturalism post, Larry Moran states his view that supernatural hypotheses can be tested, pointing to the hypothesis that God caused a worldwide flood some time in the last few millennia.
Resident dope UB asks:
Why use an example that has nothing whatsoever to do with ID? Perhaps you’ve used the “ID creationism” line one time too many, and misplaced the simple fact that they are not the same thing?
But UB, I ask, what does intelligent design have to do with the supernatural? Haven't we been told many times that the designer need not be supernatural?
Or
But UB, I say, he uses an example of a creationist hypothesis because ID has no testable hypotheses?
Meanwhile, over on the Rabbit and Coke can thread, Origenes grandly refers to the law of conservation of information. Unfortunately, the (UD) page he links to for an explanation of the law of conservation of information is 404ed. So that information wasn't conserved, I guess.
--------------
Speaking for myself, I have long been confused . . .-Denyse O'Leary
|
