Bob O'H
Posts: 2564
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
Having nothing better to do, I've just been reading the opening statements. During his statement for the defendents, Gillen says this:
| Quote |
He will also testify that efforts to disqualify IDT from science based upon causation ortestability or other so-called demarcation criteria, including so-called methodological naturalism, are inherently flawed. Dr. Fuller will explain that intelligent design theory is not creationism. It is not inherently religious. He will also explain, for that matter, that any number of phenomena we now understand, whether it's gravity or the wave-particle duality of quantum mechanics, were once thought to be supernatural.
(p25, l24 - p36, l9)
|
Why is the defence (sorry, defense) calling a witness who will argue that "God of the Gaps" doesn't work?
Bob
--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)
|
