Re: [asa] Re: ID without specifying the intelligence?

Eliminating the null hypothesis is not what ID is all about. Instead
it claims that ID is the null hypothesis, that which remains once we
have eliminated chance and regularity processes.
In case of evolution, ID seems satisfied to reject Darwinism and infer
design, even though this is the common fallacy of a false duality.

So what has ID done with mutations and DNA to further their ideas? Nothing.

But I would love to hear more from Paul as to what ID has done with
mutations and ID? What hypothesis was eliminated, and how? Remember
that in ID speak, complexity is merely a representation of our
ignorance.
How does ID explain the so called complexity in DNA? It doesn't. It
makes no predictions, it provides no explanations, it merely argues
that well, it surely looks designed... And surely, X cannot explain
how it arose...

Oh the irony... Now people even think that ID has contributed in a non
trivial manner to scientific inquiry by proclaiming science's
ignorance...

Paul's first step should be to recognize that information can indeed
arise from random mutations, via genetic drift, but there exists a far
more impressive pathway called selection.
It's a simple process to show that this is indeed the case. I am sure
Paul is familiar with the work by Adami, Schneider, Lenski and others
in this fascinating area of evolutionary informatics?

On 9/14/07, rpaulmason@juno.com <rpaulmason@juno.com> wrote:
> ELIMINATING something is not science? Don't we ELIMINATE the null hypothesis using Chi square in genetics? - Isn't that science? This is what ID is doing with mutations and DNA.
>
> Science is the study of reality using our senses and reason (including math). Reality could include anything that exists , not just things made of matter and energy. Dark Matter? Dark energy? Antimatter?
>
> In as much as some supernatural entity reveals something or acts in the material world it would be in the purview of empiricism to observe the effect: the resurrection of Christ or the tables of stone that Moses received. If the complexity of structures or DNA eliminates the null hypothesis (that Nothing else is going on) then we should at least be able to eliminate evolution scientifically. Further research must be done to identify what else is going on.
>
> I would not lump YEC with ID. This, unfortunately, is what many schools are afraid of - they are afraid of the legal and scientific confusion caused by the YEC camp back in the 80's - they don't want that to happen again - I don't blame them. However, if 45% of their students hold YEC misconceptions or any misconception, is it not good teaching to address it scientifically and openly?
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Sep 14 11:33:09 2007