Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (PTET @ April 18 2011,14:52)|
|Uncommon Descent is apologetics. It exists to give comfort to believers that there is progress being made with "Intelligent Design". Much of it isn't actually meant to be read (hence Denyse, KF, etc.). Behe is a scientist who supports common descent. No wonder they ignore him.|
Look at the effort UDders put into saying we can't know anything about the past. Their redefining of science isn't about finding positive ways to "prove" design, but rather to make sure that no evidence could possibly exist to support evolution in nature.
Pick any Pro-IDder you like. You'll find them saying something really, really stupid... But there they are, the all-science-so-far vanguard for creationists everywhere.
And lo, from the "Does ID Make Testable Predictions?" thread, so it came to pass ...
|ID predicts that the Universe had a beginning.|
"Let there be light ..." indeed.
Good response from rprado though ...
|I predict that a programming language and Operative System will be found in DNA, surely in the form of “machine code”, so it will have to be reverse-engineered to get the source code. That will prove Intelligent Design once and for all and also we will have a clue of the designers’ language (i.e, what “words” they use for such commands as GOTO, WHILE, FOR, END, etc., and, of course, the LABEL and comment lines!). I hope to be alive by then.|
Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy.
Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people.
Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.