Re: [asa] Fw: November Newsletter from Reasonable Faith

Yes, just like YEC. If you can't show specific mutuational pathways to explain all the history of life then you forfeit the argument and we win by default. That proves God did it. I think this is a valid argument on complexity but only from a philosophical or theological point of view. And on this point WLC and Ayala don't disagree. So what are they debating? WLC inisists on enforcing the ID party line which is that design should be scientifically detactable and his inferences are scientific and therefore atheism is falsified. What is missing from this argument is that maybe God did it but not being scientifically detectable so as to intentionally give atheists cover for their unbelief. WLC said he heard Ayala disparaging ID and he wanted to defend it so therein lies the debate. WLC assumes like ID and RTB that if God did it, He left His fingerprints on it and we can sleuth Him out and prove Him. He is not open to the fact that maybe God hid Himself in His creation so that it takes faith to find him which is more consistent with how He revealed Himself in the incarnation. Again this is not something we should be fighting over. John   ________________________________ From: Thomas Pearson <pearson@utpa.edu> To: AmericanScientificAffiliation <asa@calvin.edu> Sent: Thu, November 12, 2009 9:46:14 AM Subject: RE: [asa] Fw: November Newsletter from Reasonable Faith On Thursday, November 12, John Walley reported the following quote from William Lane Craig:   >>>First, I argued that Ayala fails to disqualify ID scientifically because he cannot show that the Darwinian mechanisms of random mutation and natural selection are capable of producing the sort of biological complexity we see on earth.<<<   Do proponents of ID routinely argue that if Darwinian mechanisms of RM and NS are inadequate as explanations, that constitutes a failure to disqualify ID scientifically?  Does that mean ID automatically becomes the default position if doubts are cast on Darwinian accounts of evolution?  It seems like a non sequitur to me.  What am I missing here?   Tom Pearson _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________   Thomas D. Pearson Department of History & Philosophy The University of Texas-Pan American Edinburg, Texas e-mail:  pearson@utpa.edu

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 12 10:06:25 2009