DARWINISM AND EVOLUTION

gluadys: "What I don't accept is the theodicy of ID—that God really is a stupid,
clumsy, irrational designer."

What you refuse to accept is no part of ID theory, which neither says nor
suggests that the designer implicated by biological designs "really is stupid,
clumsy, (and) irrational." Indeed, those kinds of characterizations of
biological designs - and, by implication, the designer - are made by critics of
ID theory whose grasp of ID theory is weak or non-existent. ID theorists don't
make such characterizations because they don't presume to judge that biological
designs fall short of optimal design (which is a fantasy). Their focus is on
showing in a scientifically rigorous way that design constitutes the best
explanation for many biological systems, structures, processes, etc. As is your
habit in arguing against ID, you're arguing against a straw man of your own
making.

Jim in Vermont

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_BR_life_in_synch_062009

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]