It's a Sad Day For the Future Of American Children.

MammuthusYour proclamation that ID is not science is crucially flawed Mamuthus:You said:

quote:

---

It is not science because it is 1) an assumption based on an inability to comprehend natural phenomenon as observed 2) presents no testable hypothesis.

---

Clearly your claim of our 'inability to comprehend natural phenomenon as observed' presumes that they are natural before they are proven to be that! You have not proven the origin of genomes. Of course they now work naturally and are submitted to evolutionary processes but you have not proved how the genomes arrived.Your second point is also plain incorrect. Both detailed ID and YECism provide testable predicitions. IDers predict that it will not be possible to find plausible paths between major novelties. YECs make numerous predictions that the flood will ultimatley explain the fossil record or that ancient DNA will be shown to be only thousands of years old for example. But I agree that these theories are not as clear in their predicitons as gavitation.Just imagine the sceanrio of aliens turning up on our doorstep saying: "We designed those genomes you guys! The creationists almost had it right." And you'll say 'but it was unscientific'. And they'll accuse you of assuming something before it was proven. And they'll label you as unscientific.[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 10-21-2002]

^ID may be hard to falisify but I don't think it's unfalsifiable. Falsifiability will always creep over time so it is not a good definition for science, even if it is typical of science. What is not falisiable now may be falisifiable in the future.Definitions of science? If having studied genomes and mechanisms of evolution one comes to the conclusion that both abiogenesis and the last 500 million years of evolution is unlikely is that unscientific? No, of course not. The last step to creationism? If you want to call that unscientific go for it. I will call it logical and I would call it consistent with the science at the very least.Abiogenesis vs evolution? I don't really agree. Genomes have advanced a lot under the heading of evolution since prokaryotes.[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 10-21-2002]