Joined: Mar. 2008
|Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 12 2011,14:22)|
|Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,14:06)|
|I'm interested in how gil and ba77 will approach this, since they assume the designer is god. They obviously have no problem with infinite resources.|
I'd be more interested in StephenB's attempt. Isn't the main part of his schtick that methodological naturalism, by limiting itself to natural explanations, is attempting to discriminate against ID? By his reasoning, supernatural causation is *REQUIRED* in design theory.
The big tent does not cover any foolishly consistent hobgoblins.
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.