>Of course, the only way of modifying ID is to change the assumptions
>regarding the IDer, which we have no evidence of existing in the first
>place without one's personal religious views. There is significant
>evidence that evolution occurred, whether people like the idea or not.
>The goal of evolution is to get at the mechanism of evolution. This is
>the opposite of ID, where the mechanism is assumed from the beginning.
While I have some problems with ID, I would not characterize it as a view
in which the mechanism is assumed from the beginning. Mechanisms are
interactions among material entities and can be studied by the methods of
science. The designer is outside the purview of science, and is not a
mechanism.
Bill Hamilton
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Hamilton, Jr, Ph.D. | Staff Research Engineer
Chassis and Vehicle Systems | General Motors R&D Center | Warren, MI
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX) | whamilto@mich.com (home email)