On 4/21/2011 15:46, andrel wrote:
> In it's purest form ID does not give an explanation what did happen if it
> wasn't evolution.
Then why is it called "intelligent design" if in its purest form it's not
hypothesizing intelligent design?
> point in defending that ID in the form stated above
I disagree that ID is "some things didn't evolve." That's backing off so far
that one is simply searching hopelessly for anything that's non-disprovable.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|