The $5,000,000 ID Research Challenge

We have come full circle. I would assume that you would have scientists submit grant applications to the ID hub. So what experiments would be in the grants as it applies to biology? What biological experiments would they need money for? So what experiments would you do in the field of biology to determine if God influenced the history of life? Can you spell those out for us? Would you do genome comparisons? What exactly? You seem to be jumping to the conclusion. What if science found that God is something we made up?

How does that give us knowledge as to how God changed life through history? Then why are you posting in this thread?

Why is that insufficient?Let's use other examples, such as lightning. At one time in history, lightning was claimed by some to be the product of supernatural activity. Through time, we were able to use our minds to discover that lightning was actually the product of natural mechanisms, not supernatural mechanisms. Why can't use these same minds to look at the evidence in the field of biology and determine if the history of life was a product of natural or supernatural mechanisms in the same way?IOW, you have failed to ever demonstrate that we are currently unable to determine if the history of life was influenced by a designer. None of this has anything to do with running experiments in the field of biology to determine if the history of life was influenced by the supernatural.

You have not shown that God appears anywhere. What I can show is that we have used our minds and the scientific evidence to test claims of God acting in nature, and we have been able to run tests to see if this is true. So why not do the same with the history of biology? In practice, it means unevidenced and faith based beliefs. No, supernatural beliefs have been shown to be false. Time and again science has shown that what was once claimed to be supernatural is actually natural and was never supernatural. Supernatural is nothing more than a God-of-the-Gaps argument, and argument from ignorance. This is why you are incapable of describing experiments that will test your God-of-the-Gaps. Your God only exists because we have not run those tests. Potential is not science.

The possibility is scientifically worthless unless it produces hypotheses that can be tested. Should crime scene investigators entertain the possibility that Leprechauns plant fingerprints at crime scenes in such a way that they are indistinguishable from the real thing? Should meteorologists entertain the possibility that clouds are really formed by Marklar, the king of clouds? Why should scientists entertain these possibilities?Every great discovery in science is related to experiments or testing ideas against new observations. Every single one. Theories that can not spawn experiments are scientifically sterile. They are still born. What we have with ID is a set of religious beliefs that people want to be taken seriously, so they try to make it look like science since people take science seriously. In doing so, they completely miss the characteristics of good science since good science is not their real goal. The label of "science" is all they really want. They just want the appearance without all of that hard work.What you are really saying is that you want other people to take your religious beliefs seriously. I get that, but you have to realize that your beliefs are not useful in the realm of science. They are not science.

What are your aims and hypotheses? What experiments would you run?

What experiments would you do to test what these limits are?

What is most interesting is that you avoided the topic of the thread. Even more, you are doing exactly what I asked ID/creationists not to do. Falsifying evolution/abiogenesis is not evidence for ID. ID still has to stand on its own.I am still waiting for the description of the experiments you will use to test ID/creationism.Added by edit: Thought it would be useful to reiterate the material from the OP."Show us what the ID research program would actually need to do, what equipment would be needed to do this research, and how you would prioritize the money in this laboratory. Show us what a real ID research program would look like.Now mind you, this money is not to be spent testing evolution. It is meant to study ID, not evolution. Any experiments that test evolution will not meet the guidelines set out in the challenge."Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Where are your experiments that test the idea that God started life?"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."--Christopher Hitchens