Re: ID *does* require a designer! (but it does not need to identify who or what he/it is)

From: Richard Wein (rwein@lineone.net)
Date: Tue Oct 17 2000 - 21:46:12 EDT

  • Next message: Richard Wein: "Re: Plonk!"

    From: Stephen E. Jones <sejones@iinet.net.au>

    [...]
    >One wonders why Richard even *bothers* debating with "irrational"
    >opponents who spout "absurd", and "nonsense" arguments?

    Well, that's the one rational thing that you've said in your last few
    replies to me.

    I suppose the answer is that I have great faith in the power of rational
    argument. I keep thinking that *this* point is so clear that even a
    creationist/IDer will be able to accept it. Or at least I used to. My faith
    in the power of rational argument has just about been knocked out of me by
    my experiences with creationists/IDers over the last year. In future, I
    doubt that I will engage in any more debates with them.

    Richard Wein (Tich)
    --------------------------------
    "Do the calculation. Take the numbers seriously. See if the underlying
    probabilities really are small enough to yield design."
      -- W. A. Dembski, who has never presented any calculation to back up his
    claim to have detected Intelligent Design in life.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 17 2000 - 21:46:18 EDT