From: Richard McGough (richard@biblewheel.com)
Date: Tue Jul 29 2003 - 22:54:19 EDT
I had written:
>>> But it is
>>> fascinating that [Glenn] went on to say that "ID-biogenesis
>>deduces God/THE
>>> DESIGNER from observational data--design, information, structure...." Do
>>> you agree with this? Is ID-biogenesis based on scientific
>>observations, as
>>> stated by Glen Morton?
>>
To which Howard replied:
>>Glenn is free to clarify or comment on his own statement.
>
To which Glen replied:
>
>If I were to be more careful I would have said, ID *tries* to deduce. The
>rest of my original comment, which wasn't requoted, goes on to note that we
>can't rule out little green men as the creator. Thus I would agree with
>Howard's point 5. I find ID logically worse than useless.
>
Point well taken Glen, but it is possible to agree with Howard's Point #5 (as we do) without taking the extreme view that ID is "logically worse than useless" as you do. His Point #5 was simply that "the identity of the form-conferring agent would remain unknown." This does not invalidate the whole ID program which could be logically *necessary* if we actually do live in a universe where the Lord God Almighty confers form on His Creation.
Note also that I didn't for a minute think that I was hiding your true intent by snipping the bit about little green men. I addressed that in detail in a separate post in this thread. The interesting thing is that it seems your point concerning "little green designers" actually *necessitates* ID rather than invalidating it. Is it not correct that if little green men in alternate universes were to create a universe with sentient beings as you suggest, that the scientifically inclined amongst those sentient beings would *require* ID to truly understand the universe in which they found themeselves?
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 29 2003 - 22:59:54 EDT