I wonder how many staunch YEC advocates are (at least in the deepest
parts of their logically oriented minds, whether conscious or not) in the
predicament described by Glenn.
>Name one thing that
>theistic science, as defined by the ID group, has discovered or predicted?
Instead of focusing only on PREDICTION (of data that is not yet known),
we should also consider the value of RETRODUCTION (to explain data that is
already known) and of EMPIRICAL RESPONSIVENESS, as defined in Section 2B
of my medium-sized overview:
"testing? We can think about whether a theory is falsifiable, and
we should also ask, "Can this theory's evaluative status be changed
(either up or down) by empirical data?" Because the answer is YES for
many theories of design, these theories are empirically responsive and
can be scientifically evaluated based on empirical data. { In some areas
of science, methods for detecting design are commonly used --- for example,
when forensic scientists investigate crimes, and when radioastronomers
search for radio signals designed by intelligent extraterrestrials.
Similar methods are also being used, and further developed, by
design-theorists. }"
Science doesn't depend only on PREdictions; explanatory RETROduction
(and empirical responsiveness) are also highly valued in scientific method.
Craig Rusbult