Design and the intelligence hypothesis

I really wonder about this. Do the various ID proponents and creationists keep tabs on the activities of others of their number on these boards? Does Randman, for example, read Evopeach's posts? If so the does the fact that none of them have commented on the total mischaracterisation of the argument for intelligent design based on irreducible complexity which Evopeach puts forward mean that they agree with his representation of it?I know that almost every one of Evopeach's totally ludicrous pretend science statements got half a dozen rebuttals from the pr-evolution camp so perhaps criticism from their own camp would be considered unneccessary, but it is surely in the interests of all the anti-evolutionists to try and maintain a reasonable level of scientific credibility as a body if they ever wish to be taken seriously.Despite occasional claims to the contrary those on the evolutionary side are never slow to pick each other up on flaws in either their science or reasoning.Is it simply that each anti-evolutionist has so many pro interlocutors that they must spend all of their time replying to them and have none to spare for casting an eye over the work of their fellows?I would really be interested to know if the other anti-evolutionist on this site consider Evopeach to be doing a good job with his debating so far.TTFN,WK

Where was the censorship? After 300 or so posts threads have been known to become unstable, therefore the admins have a policy of shutting threads down around that point. There is nothing preventing you from starting your own new thread through the 'Proposed new topics' process.So where does this claim of censorship come from, can you show us where you have been censored?TTFN,WK

It wasn't an intentional policy of the admins to limit thread length. Threads over 300 kept getting screwed up with large numbers of posts simply disappearing, I'm sure if you can provide them with the simple parameter change that will fix this they would be most obliged to you. Ooops, my bad, I obviously haven't kept current.As to it coinciding with your post, it was actually some 6 posts subsequent to your latest post in that thread. It was not of course coincidence that they closed down a thread which had completely derailed from its original topic and whih was getting through posts at quite a rate, none of which were productive or valuable, in large part due to your disinclination to address the many deficiencies in your grasp of both fundamental molecular biology, nuclear physics and indeed the concepts put forward by the proponents of Intelligent Design.TTFN,WKThis message has been edited by Wounded King, 08-10-2005 09:20 AM

Perhaps you could take this discussion to a new thread specifically on the topic of Carbon as an example of Irreducible Complexity, as Admin asked you to do.TTFN,WK

Is this supposed to be a pun or is it just another demonstration of your twisted alternative world where DNA is composed of amino acids and Catbert is called Cat Bird?TTFN,WK