In a message dated 9/13/2000 3:38:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
sejones@iinet.net.au writes:
<< NA>Nelson:
>What evidence suggests it cannot? I think the data presented thus far by
>Behe et. al. can reliably exclude natural forces.
Agreed. I keep saying "if the ID movement demonstrates that design is
empirically detectable". But they already have done that in that Behe's
irreducibly complex cases like the blood clotting cascade and the bacterial
flagellum.
>>
Not really, that's the claim but as I and others have shown, the claim is
based on an overselling of IC (and a curious link between IC and ID). It has
been shown that ICness is not a reliable detector of design since there exist
natural pathways to IC systems
<< It is just that the scientific materialists deny it on the basis of their
*philosophy* which excludes intelligent causation in natural history apriori.
>>
Not really. Unless of course intelligent causation equals a supernatural
designer. Is that what you are trying to say here? I appreciate your candor.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 01:28:17 EDT