RE: [asa] Proof That Common Descent is NOT Begging the Question

Dr. Campbell said:
" It is, of course, possible to scientifically detect human design versus other known physical causes, but that's because we know something about the motives and abilities of humans and have a large set of human-designed and "naturally" formed objects that can be used for comparison."

I think that is the key to demolishing any argument from the Discovery Institute version of ID. Behe and Dembski can't detect design; they just aim to say "evolution can't do it" (as if the conclusion from that is that their hypothesis then wins; in actuality, there could be other solutions).

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of David Campbell
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 11:03 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Proof That Common Descent is NOT Begging the Question

I agree that it is not possible to implement either of my proposed
scientific tests for design; hence, claims to scientifically detect
design or lack of design in cases of interest seem unlikely to be
correct. (It is, of course, possible to scientifically detect human
design versus other known physical causes, but that's because we know
something about the motives and abilities of humans and have a large
set of human-designed and "naturally" formed objects that can be used
for comparison.)

--
Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
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.