Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,598
"Teach the controversy" -- they think this would somehow benefit them.
Ok, I'll bite. Intelligent design, such as it is, makes some predictions. God knows there's enough on all these all over the place. So rather than pick things apart piece by piece, address the larger issues.
ID, for example, maintains as their core premise that there exist certain structures that are irreducibly complex, that basically to exist it requires too big of a mutation* from anything known to be statistically reasonable.
They then list a bunch of these. Yet one by one they get shot down as science progresses, finding out how such things could indeed come to be. That's prima facie evidence that theory bit is not solid as predictive theory.
Eh, it would probably be a re-cast page from talk.origins or some such.
* Mutation used loosely to cover everything from cosmic rays and chemical transcription errors to regular sexual reproductive crossover and controlled re-scrambling of certain genes.
Ok, I'll bite. Intelligent design, such as it is, makes some predictions. God knows there's enough on all these all over the place. So rather than pick things apart piece by piece, address the larger issues.
ID, for example, maintains as their core premise that there exist certain structures that are irreducibly complex, that basically to exist it requires too big of a mutation* from anything known to be statistically reasonable.
They then list a bunch of these. Yet one by one they get shot down as science progresses, finding out how such things could indeed come to be. That's prima facie evidence that theory bit is not solid as predictive theory.
Eh, it would probably be a re-cast page from talk.origins or some such.
* Mutation used loosely to cover everything from cosmic rays and chemical transcription errors to regular sexual reproductive crossover and controlled re-scrambling of certain genes.
Last edited:
