In a message dated 3/19/00 5:28:34 AM Dateline Standard Time, Huxter4441
writes:
>Mike Gene writes, regarding the 'sterility' of ID:
>>" ID could have indeed led me to discover proofreading during
transcription."
>Could have.... It seems.
Sure. ID gave me the hypothesis and all that was needed were the experiments
to test it.
>however, that evolution led evolutionists to find it years before you even
tried to think >up ways that ID might be useful.
Evolutionary views did not lead to this discovery, just as they had little to
do with almost every discovery about molecular and cellular biology.
>Mike continued:
>>"It led Harvey to figure out how the circulatory system works."
>As if that would have never been figured out.....
I am NOT arguing that ID is essential. I was REACTING to the claim that ID
is a sterile hypothesis and scientific dead end. Those who make this claim
have absolutely no experience trying to use ID, thus their claim is rooted in
pure ignorance (and usually, a deep-seated hostility against teleological
thinking).
The fact remains that ID is not sterile, useless, or a dead end. I know that
now and
experience trumps all rhetoric.
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 19 2000 - 17:57:17 EST