Re: Intelligent Design versus Science
- From: RF <RF@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 10:56:29 -0700
On Sun, 04 May 2008 15:10:51 GMT, "Rod" <deniecerod1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
With so many sceptics posting their views I am wondering if some of them may post their thoughts on "Intelligent Design".
I am of the view that "Intelligent Design" is a reality and that creation is not by chance.
Creation? I suppose you mean evolution, not creation. While the
mutations are random, natural selection (and sexual selection etc) is
not. The result is anything but chance. And BTW, even if life is
created by some designer, it's evolving today. Life is evolving,
created or not. Get used to it.
And the problem with ID is that it is not science. Bring in the
supernatural, and you're outside of science. ID doesn't do any
science, has no proposal for research and the only thing it has to say
about how life came to be what it is today is 'goddidit'. Oh, I'm
sorry, 'some unnamed unspecified designer didit'. All ID does is bash
evolution, and so far each and every example they came up with that
according to them could not have evolved has been proven to have
evolved. Just look up the Kitzmiller case.
When will those brainless people realize that there is not the slightest shred of evidence that a GAWD exists.
- Prev by Date: Re: MHA Rules of Engagement
- Next by Date: Re: WARNING: Industry is Blogging These NewsGroups to Impact the Public Discourse on Matters of Public Health
- Previous by thread: Re: Intelligent Design versus Science
- Next by thread: Re: Intelligent Design versus Science