Web Search powered by Yahoo! SEARCH
As for Behe's testimony, Lee, you missed the point - if we widened the definition of "scientific theory" to encompass Intelligent Design it would also encompass astrology.
But neither is a theory. Neither made it past hypothesis.
Evolution is a scientific theory, like relativity and plate tectonics, because it has evidence, observability, a mechanism, falsifiability, and can make accurate predictions.
Behe's definition of scientific theory is conveniently broad so as to elevate his hypothesis.
Now, I cannot wait for a teacher to spend a week teaching children EVERY "hypothesis" that is an alternative to evolution.
TEACHER: "Class, today we'll discuss the midichlorian hypothesis. Tomorrow, we'll discuss Rael. After we're finished with White Hole cosmology and the Bumba vomit hypothesis, if we still have time, we'll discuss Intelligent Design."
Oh, and Lee - you never described the null hypothesis of "Intelligent Design". What would an undesigned life form look like, and how would it differ from what we see today? Of course, Behe neglects the null hypothesis as well.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Username * Don't have an account? Sign up for a new account
Password * Can't remember? Reset your password
Comments can be shared on
Add both options by connecting your profiles.