From: richard@biblewheel.com
Date: Tue Jul 22 2003 - 11:48:44 EDT
Howard wrote:
>Why does this innocent-looking question cause a problem? Because in
ID-speak
>the categories "intelligently designed" and "formed by natural processes"
>re related as either/or. Dembski's approach, for instance, is to attempt to
>demonstrate "X could not have been formed by natural processes" so that the
>only alternative is "X was intelligently designed."
I'm still at a loss to understand why C-12 would be any different than the
other elements. I understand its centrality in the formation of Life, but I
do not understand why the IDers wouldn't just solve this problem by
asserting the evolution of elements through natural processes as a
*consequence* of fine-tuning the universe. It seems very strange to assert
that C-12 has to be "intelligently designed" especially in light of the fact
that we could produce in the lab (in principle, at least. Does anyone know
if it has been done?).
>Reminder: in ID-speak,
>to say that "X was intelligently designed" is to say that "X was actualized
>(assembled, formed, constructed, fabricated) in such a way as to require
one
>or more episodes of non-natural, form-conferring action by an unidentified,
>unembodied, choice-making agent."
This seems to exasperate the problem for the IDers. If C-12 is
"intelligently designed" in this sense, doesn't that mean that God had to
confer the form onto each and every C-12 nucleus apart from the natural laws
of chemical evolution? This seems like a very strange and weak agument to
me. Could you please point me in the direction of documentation on this?
Thanks. Good talking Howard.
Richard Amiel McGough
Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at
http://www.BibleWheel.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 22 2003 - 11:45:28 EDT