Re: Of Martian Sculptures (was: Re: [asa] on science and meta-science)

I should point out that the probe idea is not purely a product of my
own creativity but rather reflects a science fiction story I read many
years ago.

"Very few TEs, at least on this list, have shown much interest in
front-loading, other than Mike Gene, who probably coined the term, and
Denis Lamoureux, who popped in for a while a few weeks ago, and then
exited again. Most TEs here seem to have opted either for the "subtle
intervention through quantum indeterminacy" route, or the "God never
intervenes in evolution + Darwinian and stochastic processes are the
drivers of macroevolutionary change + stochastic mechanisms are not in
contradiction with the mysterious providence of God as understood by
Calvinism and the Westminster Confession" route."

As a Calvinistic position tends to be big on predestination, it can be
thought of as front-loading in some sense.

>As for me, I *haven't* asked for an acknowledgement from anyone here that God is "intimately involved" with specific outcomes. I *have* been trying to find out why so many people here so strongly resist the idea that nature itself -- not just private faith -- points to the conclusion of design.<

There are at least three questions here:

Does nature point to design?

Does scientific study of nature, in and of itself, point to design?

Do the lines of evidence popularized by ID work as indicators of design?

To which I would say: yes, but this is discerned by faith; no, science
doesn't do a good job with the question one way or the other; no

-- 
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.