> There is a danger
> that the "Intelligent Design" movement be interpreted as a revival of
> "Natural theology". This is something I would not be happy with.
> For me, ID is a statement of presuppositions, not a "finding" of
> science. If we do not start with God in our thinking, we will never
> "prove" the existence of God by our research.
Of course, if you "start with God," you won't be able to "'prove' the
existence of God" either, because the reasoning will be circular. ;-)
It seems that ID is attempting to show the following: If you
start with God, the data says, "compatible;" if you start by assuming
Naturalism, the data says, "incompatible."
And that's as close to "proof" as science can come, anyway.
Loren Haarsma