Hi Adminnemooseus,
If discussion were to continue from Jar's reply to Slevesque it would likely draw a great deal of attention away from the whale anatomy discussion, so I agree that Jar and Slevesque should probably table that discussion, maybe it will become more appropriate later on.
But I do think it an importance difference of opinion. Slevesque believes that we all look at the same evidence, we just interpret it differently. Jar believes that interpretations requiring unproven mechanisms are invalid. Many a theory has failed for lack of a mechanism even when right, as witness Wigner's theory of continental drift experiencing rejection until the posthumous discovery of mechanisms and more conclusive evidence. On the other hand, IDists believe they have the evidence showing that design happened and merely do not yet have evidence for how.
But as important as this difference of opinion is, this isn't the right time, and probably not even the right thread. Maybe someone wants to propose yet another thread requesting that IDists propose a mechanism?
Please, no non-admin replies to this message.
-- | Percy |
| EvC Forum Director |