Do you have any opinion as to whether the author subscribes to ID or not? I'm really not sure. At one point he equates ID with Darwinism in that they are both untestable hypotheses. I get the impression that he does not like Darwinism, but he is equating ID with Darwinism, so I am left to assume that he does not agree with ID.
The author of that article ends up with:
What needs to be examined in detail is not so much the religion behind intelligent design as the philosophy behind evolution.
My understanding is that Darwin is positing a theory (not a philosophy) to try to explain what is found in the geological record, if you google "pre-cambrian explosion" - is there a better theory than natural selection to explain the diversity of life during this period? A period not covered by The Bible.
But that is a sermon for another day.
I thought that this was a scientific debate, not a religious one? And guess what, no-one really knows what the correct answer is, or maybe you do believe that you have the correct answer Tom? You are very special. I just guess we will need to wait for you to bless us with your next sermon so that us dumb folks can see maybe 1% of what you know already :-)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment