This is just a bad test. Philosophy is not science but there are plenty of
philosophy texts. Law is not science but there are plenty of legal texts.
Not having a text only proves you are not academic but there are plenty of
academic disciplines that are not science. David's observation that even
with their own friendly journal they publish nothing is much, much, more
definitive. Please don't use this argument, use his.
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 3:45 PM, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Yes there is; it's called "Explore Evolution":
> http://www.discovery.org/a/4096
>
> Before that you of course had "Of Pandas and People."
>
> Before anyone lambastes me, I'm just pointing out that there is a
> textbook, not arguing for its merits (or demerits) or suggesting that
> ID is "science," which I think is in any event a pointless discussion.
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > One piece of evidence that "ID is not science" is that there exists no
> > textbook for it. The Discovery Institute could make a textbook if they
> > wanted- but they don't. And if they did, you know the attention and
> > critique it would get—so this proves it is not ready as a science.
> > Therefore- how could it be taught in schools, if there's no textbook for
> it
> > ???
>
>
>
> --
> David W. Opderbeck
> Associate Professor of Law
> Seton Hall University Law School
> Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue May 6 17:58:18 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 06 2008 - 17:58:18 EDT