Nuggin writes:
What confuses me more about your post is that you say that IDers themselves can't agree on many very important factors within their own theory. (ie mechanics of, timeline of, cause of)
As far as I understand ID, this is correct.
Philip Johnson seems to believe that every species was separately created by God, within an OE \ fossil evidence framework.
Michael Behe thinks (at least at one point, Behe's thoughts have been revised since he wrote DBB and I'm not sure to what extent this was affected) that common descent is true, just that certain organelles (and whales) need an extra push from God.
I've never seen a coherent position from Dembski on this issue, he seems more interested in obfuscating the meaning of the No Free Lunch principle then in advancing his own theory. He's the Isaac Newton of Information Theory, not a biologist. He might well have put one forth, I'm not sure.
Nuggin writes:
It sounds like ID is less a theory than a collection of people who "don't like evolution" for either conceptual or religious reasons.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
The DI now admits this, after a fashion. They currently urge people to "teach the controversy" and didn't support the Dover PA. school district teaching ID to its students. This is because they can't teach anything other than problems they see with evolution, it's really all they have.
Chris
This message has been edited by cmanteuf, 09-08-2005 01:55 PM
This message has been edited by cmanteuf, 09-08-2005 01:56 PM