Nucacids wrote:
WRE> My comment that by Dembski's
WRE> criteria, NS could be held to be an intelligent designer was
WRE> meant to convey to the reader the concept that Dembski's
WRE> argument was flawed, not that NS actually therefore *was* an
WRE> intelligent designer. The
WRE> actualization-exclusion-specification triad that Dembski
WRE> extols is not exclusive of natural selection.
NA>Which is probably not a problem when dealing with
NA>the origin of the first cells on this planet.
So? There are plenty of claims made by ID proponents where
it *is* a problem.
I'm reminded of the joke told about the Scottish lawyer tasked
with defending a man accused of murder. He faces the jury in
the opening argument and says, "The prosecution says that they
will produce three witnesses who will say thae saw my client
kill the victim. Well, I will produce THIRTY witnesses who
will testify that they dinna see him do it!"
Wesley
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Oct 06 2000 - 03:01:28 EDT