Mike Hough wrote:
> From the wiki article: Behe eventually testified under oath that "There are 
> no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design 
> supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed 
> rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system 
> occurred"
> 
> That says it all, really. While scientists must provide sound experimental 
> or empirical evidence to support a hypothesis, ID proponents merely point 
> out the things that scientist do not know for certain and use that to 
> dismiss everything else. Something you often hear in the scientific 
> community is "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." The only 
> logical conclusion one can make is that ID is not a science.

Reading the judge's summing up made for interesting reading... It's 
heartening to hear that somebody is still sane. So often in this world 
court rulings seem to produce absurd results.

The response was equally insane: "The Dover decision is an attempt by an 
activist federal judge to stop the spread of a scientific idea and even 
to prevent criticism of Darwinian evolution through government-imposed 
censorship rather than open debate, and it won't work. He has conflated 

he totally misrepresents intelligent design and the motivations of the 
scientists who research it."

What. The. Hell.

Seriously, how can people actually be allowed to utter such outragous 
lies?! o_O

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message