Joined: Mar. 2007
|Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Mar. 04 2007,15:59)|
|Gee, thanks. THAT certainly clears everything up. (sigh)|
The proponents of intelligent design are intentionally misrepresenting ID by describing ID as a "scientific theory." They should not be allowed to tell that lie over and over and I am trying to POLITELY stop them from lying by accurately describing ID as an unverified scientific hypothesis.
In "The God Delusion," author Richard Dawkins formulated and considered the God Hypothesis. Building on his example, I put intelligent design into the form of a scientific hypothesis.
Dawkins judged the God Hypothesis as very unlikely to be correct. Similarly, I believe that the Intelligent Design Hypothesis is very unlikely to be correct. However, I refrained from stating this opinion on the above-referenced web page because the proponents of ID are (I cautiously assume) making good-faith efforts to subject their hypothesis to scientific testing at their "God Lab." They might not be making scientifically honest efforts to test their hypothesis but I am willing -- for now -- to give them the benefit of the doubt.
I am very skeptical but I feel that it would be unfair to criticize their efforts to confirm their hypothesis if they are in fact making good-faith efforts to proceed in accordance with the rules of science.