Re: 1. Mike Behe's letter to SCIENCE, 2. Provine & Gish's letters, 3. Less of...

From: Huxter4441@aol.com
Date: Mon Jul 17 2000 - 18:22:14 EDT

  • Next message: Steve Clark: "Re: 1. Mike Behe's letter to SCIENCE, 2. Provine & Gish's letters, 3. Less of..."

    In a message dated 7/17/00 11:06:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
    ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu writes:

    << > > but rather it is because he argues that "intelligent design in biology
    >.... is empirically detectable":
    >
    >Why, then, doesn't he suggest a method? He only talks in generalities.
     
     He does suggest a method. Mike says that ID is detectable by irreducible
     complexity. >>

    But since IC is little more than an assumption based on the ignorance of the
    history of the system in question, that is no evidence at all. One should
    wonder why nothing tangible is in evidence....



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 17 2000 - 18:22:29 EDT