Message 14 writes:
that's what we would do only we would allow for other possibilities
Message 14 writes:
We could compare and contrast [snip] We could allow for the possibility [snip] We could look at the stars exploding [snip] We could look at the human body [snip] who knows we may find out things we never would have contemplated given evolution as the only acceptable route.
Message 32 writes:
I'd say that with ID you'd brainstorm along different lines as well as along evolutionary lines and test your hypotheses just like science always does.
Message 36 writes:
ID has the potential to further science by escaping the box of materialism.
Message 37 writes:
...if there's any truth in the non-reigning paradigm which I'm sure there is.
How many years would be nessesary before you would decide that your idea should be investigated for supporting evidence? You can look into the future and suppose all you want about changing the way people approach science and
you hope getting different results. My question is
when does ID plan to start supporting these suppositions with evidence?
Why are you pushing for an idea that may be valid if people possibly look into it, and hopefully could someday have results that you hope may possibly be favourable to your cause? If I just made something up would I be correct in expecting your support in an attempt to change "reigning paradigms"? If I made something up would you first ask for evidence before marching behind me?
You have said what you hope ID will do. When will it be done? Most importantly, how will it be done? Why should
possible science be considered, let alone taught in schools, when it hasn't been
done yet?
™ Version 4.2
