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: 81
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 17 2007,20:41   

I made a comment over three hours ago over here:
Why Mathematicians, Computer Scientists, and Engineers Tend to be More Skeptical of Darwinian Claims

But the comment is "still in moderation," so I'll post it here just in case:
6:33 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.

Gil wrote: ďÖwe must demonstrate that our stuff can actually work in the real world, or at least that it has a reasonable prospect of working in the real world. Ē

Thatís right, we have to provide mechanistic descriptions. We produce models.

Tell us, what is the ID model of the history of life? Oh, thatís right you donít have one; IDists excuse themselves from that.

Thatís why great majority of Mathematicians, Computer Scientists, and Engineers find ID to be useless. (On what basis can I speak on behalf of these groups? Itís the same basis you have.)

BTW, for any of you who don't know, I am an engineer myself.

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]