RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 13 2007,15:20   

Quote (Chris Hyland @ April 13 2007,14:25)
Granville Sewell asks Is ID really rooted in science? Of course he doesn't actually provide any evidence for it, and most of the post is the claim that 'There are, in fact, some fairly persuasive reasons to believe that the development of life was due to natural causes, but when we honestly analyze them, they all reduce to the argument “this doesn’t look like the way a designer would have done things.”' although he doesn't provide any evidence for that either.

Edit: If someone starts to read that post undecided on the answer to that question I really hope they don't see the second reply

It's sad to see professors descend to the level of UD.  Next stop: JADville.

"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]