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

IOW, ID has no scientific use at all. The only use for ID is as a religious argument against atheism. Have I got this right?

What we are asking is how one explores these paths in a scientific manner. For purposes of this thread, you can even assume that evolution is false. So how does ID science work? How do scientists apply this theory to research? No, you didn't. All you said is that you first throw evolution out. We want to know what the second step is. What is next? You are doing a great job of demonstrating this for us. You are completely incapable of describing how ID science is done. So where have these tools been put into practice in order to discover new functions?

So you once again claim that "supernatural" is the same as "ignorance"? So the supernatural only exists in fictional events? How is science supposed to investigate fictional stories? Supernatural means outside of the natural, not within the natural.

Then why do you define it as "ignorance"? Supernatural means that it can never be understood through science. This is quite different from your definition which states that it is currently not understood by science. The question in this thread is how supernatural explanations are supposed to work within science. So how does that work? Or can it?

So you are saying that the events, as you described them, really happened? What is fictional about matter bending the path of starlight per the laws of relativity? What is fictional about this matter not absorbing or emitting light? Please explain.

I would have to agree with Percy. There is a clear contradiction. When people claim that something is supernatural, like faith healing, they care claiming a positive belief in the supernatural. What tesla seems to be forwarding is a negative belief, quite the opposite of the colloquial usage. "Supernatural" is used to denote activities that are outside the purview of scientific explanation, not activities that we are ignorant of.To swing this back on topic, what supernatural mechanisms are ID supporters really pushing? Natural mechanisms? Perhaps something akin to Lamarckism or Lysenkoism? No. They are pushing the idea that God directly acted on matter to produce life (or ex nihilo if you prefer). What we are asking is how this mechanism can be tested by science.

So which are they? Unexplainable, unexplained, or supernatural? I still don't understand why you think that particles which lack the ability to interact with light are somehow supernatural? Can you explain? Neutrinos, for example, hardly interact with larger atoms at all. Does this make neutrinos supernatural?A prosecutor's case may be full of holes. The prosecutor may not have solid evidence linking the defendant to the murder scene, for example. Does this mean that the murder victim was killed by supernatural means? Does this mean that the prosecutor's case is also supernatural?Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

How do we determine if something will always be unexplainable?Also, when someone says that an event was caused by the Supernatural they are claiming that they DO HAVE AN EXPLANATION. That it IS EXPLAINED. So something can not be supernatural and unexplained at the same time. However, supernatural is not defined as unexplained. The supernatural is an explanation in itself.For example, if a jet is flying at supersonic speeds does that mean it is flying at unexplained speeds? You are equating dark matter with the supernatural, are you not?

I will try to use dark matter as an example of how science works in order to further this discussion.When astronomers looked at spiral galaxies they noticed that the spin rates of the galaxies did not match up with the mass as measured by luminous matter (the matter that absorbs and emits light).Now, how would supernatural research address this problem? Well, we could profer the idea that God was slowing them down. So what experiments could we run to test this idea? What testable hypotheses could we put forth? How would these hypotheses be falsifiable? IOW, how does supernaturalism work as part of the scientific method, from hypothesis through testing to making conlcusions? Let's break this down:1. Observation: The spin rate of galaxies is slower than expected given the amount of luminous matter in the galaxy.2. Hypothesis:So what is the supernatural hypothesis? How is it testable and falsifiable? So what hypotheses will we be testing in this research? How is the hypothesis falsifiable?

What experiments is this funding going to pay for? What observations from these experiments would falsify or confirm the supernatural?It is not enough to say "fund research". You need to be specific as to the experiments that will be done and the expected/falsifying results. What research could be done? What are the experiments?Did it ever occur to you that no research is being funded because there is nothing scientific to do research on?

I think that there is a real disconnect between those who believe that supernaturlism can work in science and those who actually do science. Perhaps an analogy will help. The following conversation is between a new football fan and a football coach (american football or soccer work equally well).Fan: Hey coach, you should be using quantum theory in games and in practice.Coach: How do I do that?Fan: Well, you use it as part of your football program.C: Again, how do I do that?F: If you weren't so closed minded, you would understand how quantum theory can be used.C: So, what am I blind to?F: How quantum theory can help your football program.C: We are right back where we started. How can it help my football program specifically?F: Well, I don't know about specifics, but the first thing I would do is get a bunch of football experts and help them put quantum theory into how football is done.C: You still haven't answered my question.And so it goes. Those pushing supernaturalism have no idea how science is done, but they are just sure that supernaturalism would work. They go one step further and blame the absence of supernaturalism on biases held by scientists, all the while forgetting that many are in fact theists. In the analogy above, we can confirm that both quantum theory and football are real things. However, there is nothing in quantum theory that is really useful for the activity of football. The same for science. There is nothing in supernaturalism that is useful in science.