>> Nelson:
>> An irreducibly complex systems can only be built simultaneously. Thus
>> physical precursors are eliminated as the designer. It can not be built
>> gradually , step by step.
>
> Howard:
> So, ID (which, presumably, is implied by the presence of IC) is not really
> about "design" but about the manner in which something is "built" or
> assembled?
>
> Nelson:
> Well one of the ways design is evident is in how something is built or
> assembled. If I see a group of rocks that form a sequence specific pattern
> which says "Welcome to the Rockies" I eliminate natural pathways and make a
> design inference. But what I was talking about above was how Irreducibly
> Complex systems eliminate natural processes as a cause and offers
> intelligent design as a plausible alternative.
>
>
> Howard:
> I take it that you agree, then, that ID Theory (as it is promoted by
> Johnson, Behe, Dembski, et al) would be more accurately named NONA Theory
> (non-natural assembly theory)?
>
> Nelson:
> Why would I?
>
I think it would be an exemplary act of candor and integrity. Perhaps the
leadership of the ID movement would take notice and follow your good
example.
Howard Van Till
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 13 2000 - 13:47:49 EDT