Re: Whose Burden of Proof?

From: Howard J. Van Till <hvantill@chartermi.net>
Date: Mon Dec 01 2003 - 19:40:37 EST

>From: "Steve Petermann" <steve@spetermann.org>

>
> I think there are at least two schools of thought in the ID movement
> regarding the casual joint. Some(Johnson?) see a break in the continuous
> action of natural laws and some(Dembski from my last reading) are inclined
> to look to natural quantum indeterminacies as the source of intelligent
> activity.

1) Could you supply the reference for this? It does not sound at all like
Dembski.

2) As it stands, this makes no sense. How can natural quantum
indeterminacies be the __source__ of intelligent activity???

3) Some people try to use quantum indeterminacies as a place where divine
determination is obscured from plain view, but I doubt that such a strategy
would satisfy ID advocates. One of the pillars of the ID theology is that
divine creative action makes a __detectable__ difference.

Howard Van Till
Received on Mon Dec 1 19:45:45 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Dec 01 2003 - 19:45:45 EST