ChemiCat
Posts: 532
Joined: Nov. 2013
|
| Quote | Gary Gaulin - Saturday, October 31, 2015 1:11:00 AM
Hi Bill, since a theory is a testable explanation for how something works or happened: the best explanation will best explain to scientists how to model how intelligent cause works and what happened during events such as the Cambrian Explosion, and without needing to resort to (as in Darwinian evolutionary theory) a "natural selection" based explanation.
After having a testable explanation it is possible to compete for which theory (ID evolutionary theory or Darwinian evolutionary theory) best explains how "evolution" works and how to model the process. That gets measured by which one scientists find most useful in their science work and may depend on which area of science the theory is being used for. I'm not sure about paleontology but the ID theory I defend is way more useful in cognitive science than generalizations that cannot explain how intelligence and intelligent cause/causation works (and predicts a biological "singularity" type event of some kind is possible).
The first step is to develop a testable theory with at least as much explanatory power as the (Darwinian) "natural selection" based explanations. Without that the only thing you have are arguments against another theory and when properly legally challenged will result in another trial that ID will lose, just like in Dover. |
Is this a translation from the Japanese via Portuguese to Gaulinese. If it is I will have to rewrite the Gaulinese to English
|
