SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Brumar89 who wrote (97735)3/11/2005 10:51:55 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (3) of 108807
 
That's interesting. You're telling me that the hypothesis (I hesitate to call it a theory) of intelligent design is that there was an intelligent designer. Period. I was expecting something else.

I was expecting it to be an alternative process for how we got to be here, something that would replace creationism and evolution, not just as assertion of who or what instigated the process. For example, evolution tells us that mammals have walked the earth for X years and creation tells us that, no, it's Y years. So I was expecting ID to have enough science and enough detail to say, no, it's Z years. I expected ID to have an explanation for all the same things that evolution and creationism are intended to explain.

This makes sense given that I've researched a fair amount on the subject and not found a layout of the process. As I mentioned earlier, it seemed that folks advocating ID had quite different processes in mind although not articulated. I took that to be a shortfall in either documentation. But perhaps an articulated process isn't intended. Although I don't know how that can be for something intended to be taught in schools as science.

I'll look forward to your further exchange with cos on the subject.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext