RE: [asa] Does the flagellum prove Genesis?

I do agree that ID did begin as countering materialism and so it certainly appeared as a negative since it was fighting Darwinism in the philosophical plane. I have always said that everyone that is doing good science is an ID proponent. Good science is the result of intelligence and rationality in the scientists themselves. Is not intelligence and rationality then somewhat encrusted in the structure of Nature? Paraphrasing John 3:6, "that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," that which is born of intelligence is intelligence.

Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Randy Isaac
Sent: Sat 12/8/2007 10:30 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Does the flagellum prove Genesis?

I have encouraged my ID friends, who keep saying that ID is not a negative approach but a positive indicator of design, to really pursue that direction. I have urged them to identify a specific example that is not negative or anti-evolution but is nevertheless a positive indication of an intelligent design in their opinion. I'm still waiting. Perhaps you could help provide one?
 
Randy
 
P.S. Hint: I do have a list of candidates in mind.

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: John Walley <mailto:john_walley@yahoo.com>
        To: 'Dehler, Bernie' <mailto:bernie.dehler@intel.com>
        Cc: asa@calvin.edu
        Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 4:18 PM
        Subject: RE: [asa] Does the flagellum prove Genesis?

        Thanks!!! This nails it for me. The problem with ID is that instead of being just pro-design, they went negative and anti-evolution.

        ...

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Dec 9 11:56:34 2007