Stephen quoted:
>The ABC news article has an interview with Phil Johnson who briefly states
>the ID position on evolution and distinguishes it from Biblical literalism:
>
> "An Intelligent Designer Philip Johnson is a professor of law at the
> University of California at Berkeley and a proponent of the
> intelligent design theory. He rejects evolution because, he says, we
> lack sufficient hard evidence to prove life came from non-living
> material. He does not take the bible literally and accepts that the
> Earth is millions of years old. However, he adds, life is still the
> result of an "intelligent designer, what many people call God."
>
>and
>
> "Evolution is still a theory," he said. "It's not a fact and it
>should be
> taught as a the controversial theory it is. Science is about
> questioning things and we should question evolution."
>
Johnson is well aware that in science "theory" doesn't mean "speculation."
The truth doesn't really matter if it doesn't serve the cause. He also
knows that evolutionary ideas and propositions are always being tested
(questioned) and sometimes falsified but usually confirmed. How does one
test for and therefore possibly falsify the idea that life is the result of
an intelligent designer? If there is no way to falsify ID there is no way
for it not to be religion.
Susan
----------
The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our
actions. Our inner balance and even our very existence depend on it. Only
morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to life.
--Albert Einstein
http://www.telepath.com/susanb/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 04 2000 - 09:56:34 EDT