ID Failing--at Christian Institutions

ID is still on the rise. The fact research money was reportedly available, but no one took them up on it is very interesting. You guys see it as a failure of ID. I see it as evidence ID can get research money, and if the scientists it was offered to turned it down, I strongly suspect you will see some that get some grants for specific research.I can think of a lot of areas for ID research, such as:1. Researching adaptive mutations.
2. Researching degrees of non-randomness in mutations.
3. Comprehensively researching the fossil record, such as the theorized land mammal to whale evolution, to see if the numbers of fossils of theorized transitional species is what one would expect for ID or for evolutionary models.
5. Quantum physics research that could be related, except this would be hard to do unless one could fine a QM physics researcher interested in the subject.
6. Researching consciousness since presumably ID would need to include a Designer with consciousness. For example, researching NDEs more could be a start to defining what human consciousness is in terms of where it occurs.Heck, I can think of a lot of areas for research, and wouldn't mind being involved in helping to put together a group to research the fossil/transitional question, but I am not a paleontologist. So it'd have to be some others doing much of the work.This message has been edited by randman, 12-11-2005 03:58 PM

All zip and no substance....a good evo response.

Assuming that is correct, I think that will change because I just thought of a bunch of good ideas for proposals, and I beleive ID scientists will take advantage of the offer of research money.You have to realize the idea is bigger than the Discovery Institute.

That they exhibit a non-random mechanism for mutation in response to an external stimuli that on it's own does not cause the mutation, but the cause stems from the embedded design within DNA. That there are non-random mechanisms involved in DNA mutations; some are known of course, and others such as the cause of adaptive mutations are under research. Providing an overview of what causes non-random mutations, and proposing research into possible other areas would be of interest. Wrong ToE predicts a process occurred. One can look at the fossil record to see if the fossil record indicates ToE occurred as evos claim, or did not. For example, evos claim the reason 99.9% of transitional forms are not seen is due to fossil rarity, but that is an unsubstantiated claim because it does not explain why, if fossilization is so rare, it is also so common for many species. That there is a deeper reality within the universe governing over what people considered "material" 100 plus years ago, and that this deeper aspect contains properties normally associated in prior times with spiritual descriptions on how the universe works. That is exists. The purpose of the research would be to define it's properties so science can have a better working basis in which to include consciousness in it's theories on the universe and real world.

Mangy, you asked. I answered. I think further substantiating the fossil arguments, etc,...takes us to other threads, which you are welcome to participate on, which contain quite a bit of material answering your questions.

Mangy, no, because it would seriously take this thread off-topic.Tell you what. See if I can make a facetious point. Can you substantiate the dictionary definitions in all of the words you have used on this thread so we can see if they are accurate? Please spend several hours listing definitions from at least 3 dictionaries.In the context of this thread, I commented on areas I can think of for ID research in response to someone else's comments along those lines. It was already going off-topic right there.I decided to veer close to off-topic stating I can think of some. You asked for more details, and I gave them to you. That's where it ends. The relavant point is that there are claims that ID research is possible. Getting into more specifics is against the rules for this thread, even by my loose standards.Now you are asking for even more details, thus demanding I take this thread completely off-topic, and I am not going to do that mangy. More details on fossilization, etc,...comprise several enture threads, and you know that.If you want to appeal to a moderator on this, please do so but quit taking this thread more off-topic than it is.

Thanks for pointing that out.As sort of a close-out for this topic, some of the prior threads discussing fossilization in terms of whether the fossil record overall actually supports ToE or not, with a focus on whale evolution as the area of testing evo claims in this area:http://EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils -->EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils
http://EvC Forum: where was the transition within fossil record?? [Stalled: randman] -->EvC Forum: where was the transition within fossil record?? [Stalled: randman]
http://EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils Part II -->EvC Forum: Land Mammal to Whale transition: fossils Part II