>But design, like undirected "evolutionism" is a world view that is neither
>supported or refuted by the mechanistic evolution model. One does not need
>to invoke either the design or adirectional paradigms for a "proper"
>understanding of the mechanistic model that is evolution. Rather, I believe
>that both sides need to understand that because the model is consistent with
>both world view paradigms, the accuracy of the model does not threaten
>either world view.
It seems to me that the advantage (from a strictly scientific point of
view) of the intelligent design paradigm is that if scientists look for
design in nature and the design is there to find, they will learn useful
things about nature that others may not necessarily disconver. I've often
challenged creationists and ID folks as follows: people judge an enterprise
by its results. Develop a treatment for AIDS (for example) that people not
holding your paradigm would be unlikely to have looked for and the world
will listen to you (at least more than they do now)
Bill Hamilton
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Hamilton, Jr, Ph.D. | Staff Research Engineer
Chassis and Vehicle Systems | General Motors R&D Center | Warren, MI
William_E._Hamilton@notes.gmr.com
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX) | whamilto@mich.com (home email)