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: 80
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2007,21:54   

Quote (Richardthughes @ July 09 2007,01:29)
More EF on the Sci Phi Show:

Worth a gander.

See Sal extol previously unknown capabilities of the EF in this UD thread: MIT's Department of Biological Engineering

From my latest comment there:
You claimed that the EF could be used to identify designs such as backup systems. Please show how the EF, a tool that is intended to do nothing more than attribute things to law, chance, or design, can do this.

You don’t have to go through the steps of the EF; just start from the end of the EF process, where you have already determined whether or not there was intelligent causation. Then take us to where you have identified a backup system.

From here, it looks like you are just equivocating on the word “design.”

Invoking intelligent design in science is like invoking gremlins in engineering. [after Mark Isaak.]
All models are wrong, some models are useful. - George E. P. Box

  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]