So Just How is ID's Supernatural-based Science Supposed to Work? (SUM. MESSAGES ONLY)

Science presupposes that there is a single objective reality.The alternative is to suppose that there is no single objective reality, that nothing is real -- is this the ID position? Should that position be taught in science class?Science presupposes that the objective evidence we observe\experience\witness truly represents that reality.The alternative is to suppose that evidence is false -- is this the ID position? Should that position be taught in science class?Science presupposes we need to test our concepts against the evidence of reality to weed out falsehood and fantasy.The alternative is to suppose that we don't need to test concepts to weed out falsehood and fantasy -- is this the ID position? Should it be taught in school?Science presupposes that any invalidated theories are false and no longer relevant to understanding reality.The alternative is to suppose that we need to consider every theory that has ever been proposed as still possibly as true as any other -- is this the ID position? Should it be taught in school?Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : sp

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

I noticed you did not answer the questions about what ID presupposes. Because evolution doesn't begin with a presupposition of an "invisible Designer" it is "anti-objective" .... The position of evolution is that the fossils, field and lab studies and genetics are telling the truth when they show a development of apparent design over time. The position of evolution is that the fossils, field and lab studies and genetics are telling the truth when the evidence of increased complexity (= evidence of design) is entirely consistent with the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation -- especially when they see the same processes "undoing" apparent design on occasion as some organisms evolve into a simpler kind of life.The position of evolution is that the fossils, field and lab studies and genetics are telling the truth when they show there is no design direction or purpose in the evolution of life on earth.The position of evolution is that the fossils, field and lab studies and genetics are telling the truth when they come to the same conclusions from entirely different sources of information.Ever figure out what Mayr really meant on evolution?Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : link

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

If I use dwise1's statement (Message 54): And I note that the bird characteristics show it is close to basal in the bird lineage, but that it is proportionally more coelurosaur than modern birds are.Then I note that (according to evolutionary theory) the earliest possible organism that could be classified as a bird would only have the most rudimentary features of what later develop into modern birds, and that the rest of the characteristics would be like those of the non-bird ancestors.From this I can conclude that the branching off from the lineage of coelurosaur \ dinosaur has occurred with Archaeopteryx, and thus it is a bird by that evidence, and that the traits of modern birds that differ from Archaeopteryx have evolved later. That is testable. Of course we expect whole families of closely related species to be evolving under similar natural selection pressures, some successful and some not.The questions though, relating to ID starting with different assumptions and having alternate explanations, are (1) how do IDologists explain archy, and (2) what do those explanations predict we can find in other fossils that will test those explanations and differentiate the ID concept from the evolutionary one?Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : added ID

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Or Natural science - Wikipedia

quote:

---

In science, the term natural science refers to a rational approach to the study of the universe, which is understood as obeying rules or laws of natural origin. The term natural science is also used to distinguish those fields that use the scientific method to study nature from the social sciences, which use the scientific method to study human behavior and society; and from the formal sciences, such as mathematics and logic, which use a different methodology.

---

and Supernatural - Wikipedia

quote:

---

The supernatural (Latin: super- "above" + natura "nature") pertains to entities, events or powers regarded as beyond nature, in that they cannot be explained from the laws of the natural world. Religious miracles are typical of such “supernatural” manifestations, as are spells and curses, divination, the notion that there is an afterlife for the dead, and innumerable others. Supernatural themes are often associated with magical and occult ideas.

---

The question is not whether it could be done by supernatural action, but how it would look if it was due to supernatural action: how would it be different? What would we expect to see in the fossil record and in the genetic record?Let's assume for the sake of the argument that there is an IDer: what can we expect evidence to look like? So if we assume that there is an IDer, then we could expect that any supernatural action would not be duplicated in replication studies, and therefore any study that is reproducible shows natural action? Isn't this what science already distinguishes by insisting on replication of studies? If science can do this AND explain all the evidence is there a problem with what science does explain? Yeah, it's known as the god of the gaps argument, that any area of ignorance MUST be evidence for IDing because of the lack of scientific knowledge. (Note this basically admits that there is no evidence that is actually FOR any type of ID action, and one wonders why there can't be evidence FOR this concept if it is true).The real question is how ID would work. In evolution we have several observable mechanisms that have been documented in operation - mutation, natural selection, speciation, genetic drift, sexual selection - and there is a direct relationship between mechanism and possible results.What is the mechanism that ID proposes?If it proposes that mutations are caused by an ID agent, then we should see some purpose behind mutations, some objective of design. Instead there is a random pattern. We do not see what we would expect by this assumption.If it proposes that natural selection is influenced by control of the environmental factors, then we should see some purpose behind environmental changes, some objective of design. Instead we see another random pattern. We do not see what we would expect from this assumption.If it proposes that natural catastrophes are used as a control on undesirable forms of life, then we should see some purpose behind natural catastrophes, some objective of design. Instead we see another random pattern and one that bears no relation to the duration of certain forms of life (dinosaurs existing for 200 million years between extinction events). We do not see a pattern consistent with this assumption.Is there some other mechanism by which the operation of ID is actually implemented. It is one thing to have a design, a design without implementation is the same as no design.Am I missing something?Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Don't you know? The discovery of Troy showed that the story of Achilles is true, which proves that the designer was Zeus. It's all greek to me ...Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

The fact that you buy (literally) a hoax doesn't mean science needs to investigate it.But my response in Message 98 was directed at jarMessage 97: But now that I have your divided attention, you seem to be under the impression that there is a lot of evidence that is actively being suppressed by a conspiracy involving almost all science. That's a lot to base on a hoax - a creationist hoax - that hides it's own evidence from real research and only sells to gullible believers, Buz. I've seen your evidence Buz, remember? But that isn't the issue of this thread, the issue of this thread is:So Just How is ID's
Supernatural-based Science
Supposed to Work?
If it is science there must be a prediction based on a theory based on evidence.How come none of it is ever presented if it exists?
How does that work?It seems that all you have is a premise:(It is maybe just possible that perhaps a designer exists)and a political program built around a sound-bite that is a falsehood designed to fool gullible people.(Teach the controversy)How is that science?So buz,What is your response to the specifics of the topic relative to your comments?Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

You don't understand this because you don't really understand how evolution works, and you have a false understanding that gets in your way. It's really simple: evolution is the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation, and it is a continuous process. This means that the hereditary traits in generation 1 are (necessarily) different from the hereditary traits in generation 2, which are (necessarily) different from the hereditary traits in generation 3. Thus generation 2 is de facto intermediate and transitional between generation 1 and generation 3. In any species, at any time. It's basically tautologous with what evolution really involves: the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation.Likewise each individual is fully formed for the species at that time (even those that have birth defects and that die, usually young and usually without reproducing).If that is not enough explanation and you want to continue this conversation, or you want to see how this leads to (real biological) macroevolution and the diversity of life, we can take it to MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it?, as it is off-topic here. Because they did not develop “fully formed in an instant,” and they did develop along the way, in “fully formed” intermediate, transitional stages (see above). Birds - feathered flying dinosaurs (including archaeopteryx and modern birds) - evolved from feathered non-flying dinosaurs that also had hollow bones as well as circulation and neurological systems much like those of modern birds (compared to "reptiles" - birds did not evolve directly from reptiles). Evolution progresses by intermediate steps and transitional stages, not in sudden "large scale changes" that are “fully formed in an instant” in spite of creationist propaganda to the contrary.If that is not enough explanation or you want to discuss how this happens - how your "large scale change" happens - we can take this to the Dogs will be Dogs will be ???, as it is off-topic here. See above comments and threads, as this is off-topic here. The question for you here and now - on this thread - is How is ID's Supernatural-based Science Supposed to Work? Take for example (1): for the sake of argument, let's assume that sudden large scale change occurs: how is this implemented by an ID agent? How can we tell whether such an agent was involved or not? How can we distinguish this from natural but unusual processes?Take for example (2): we know we can, and have, designed and implemented genetic changes in some species (crop plants, laboratory mice, etcetera), so how can we test for those changes being designed instead of natural? Can we identify intentionally modified organisms and species by some process?If you cannot distinguish supernatural events from natural but unusual ones, and you cannot distinguish intentionally modified organisms and species, that we KNOW are intentionally modified, from natural ones, then WHAT do you have to teach that is science and not philosophy, or worse, just assumption?That is the task for this thread. Try thinking inside the box ...Posting anything else will be taken as the usual evidence of absolute failure/inability/bankruptcy of the concept of ID and the usual shell game of trying to hide that fact.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Another test could be using the claim that information can only decrease by evolution, so if they can (1) measure information then they can try to show\document that (2) the natural evolutionary change only shows decrease while the human designed change only shows increase in this measured quantity.I await the results.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : PS - This was originally holmes' idea

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

We can't just assume it Buz. The question is how design is implemented. For one, this is not about evidence for the bible, but about how design is implemented.Second, how many creationists go out to prove the Paluxy Human Footprints are a hoax? Clean your own house, get rid of all the lies and falsehoods and intentional misrepresentations, the con artists and the scams, THEN if anything is left we can discuss it.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.