Intelligent Design or Darwinean Evolution?

Darwinian evolution and ID are NOT at odds.Darwinian evolution starts AFTER the emergence of life.ID is about how the first life came into being.ID is a contrary view to abiogenesis NOT evolution.Evolution is a contrary view to special creation of diverse life forms.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:

Not so. ID covers a range of views, but it most certainly is in att odds with evolution in many cases.
Behe's standard example of the bacterial flagellum could be about abiogenesis, but his other favourite example of the blood clotting mechanism certainly is not.

---

Ah ... I was mainly thinking in terms of the potential for
design in DNA ... didn't fully appreciate that ID covers the
design of new critters and/or features along the way.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:

Whenr IDers to get round to discussing the designer they very rarely see the design process as a one-off incident, whereafter evolution takes over - rather, they see the designer as being continuously involved whenever new "designs" are needed.

​

Therein lies one potentially devastating falsification of Darwinian evolution: imagine a colony of bacteria in lab conditions in which all, simultaneously, in one generation acquired a new, irreducably complex, mutation. Behe would have a Nobel prize before Lamarck had stopped spinning in his grave.

---

I've just changed my opinion in response to new information
(creationists take note )ID and evolution are at odds after all.Evolution doesn't preclude the existence of an originator of
life in the first place ... that I still say (even though
it's not my view that there IS an originator).Also ... the above being the case ... how DOES ID differ from
creationism ???

​

[This message has been edited by Peter, 04-11-2002]