GaryGaulin
Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012
|
| Quote (midwifetoad @ Dec. 28 2012,19:55) | | You wrote the Wikipedia article? |
No. I linked to it so that others will quickly know what the experiment is.
In this case, getting all hyped up about it meeting requirements of what you call "evolution" then leaving it at that is the ending of scientific pursuit. This ID theory expects more. Without that the experiment is boring and incomplete, the process in question not properly explained.
The researchers know that they don't have all the details yet, and they do not want to make it seem like their work is all done or else it might no longer get any funding or serious interest anymore.
The intelligence theory is explaining how to form an answer from what is already being further investigated and explained in papers. For the sake of this ID theory that research must go on. Being able to honestly agree that their work is not done yet, is not a science stopper for them. They need that in order to justify the cost of such experimentation.
It can at first seem that the added requirements for researchers is a bad thing. But there is here relatively simple theory to help sort out and explain the numerous reactions in the circuit. It's then a cognitive science based answer to help explain how our levels of intelligence work, which challenges the big-questions like never before. Researchers here only have to focus on needed lab work they are already working on anyway, that from there has a way of taking on a life of its own. Just have to explain it well enough to be computer modeled with the method explained in the theory. Same thing for finch beaks, where data indicates a mechanism (still being investigated) which senses and successfully responds to changing environment, not dumb-luck random variation in a population being acted up selection as was predicted by the Darwinian paradigm. That only makes sense in the ID paradigm, which predicted what is now known to be true for beak development behavior.
--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
|
