Judge Jones Defines Science--and Why Intelligent Design Isn't

From: Derek Gatherer (d.gatherer@vir.gla.ac.uk)
Date: Fri 06 Jan 2006 - 09:14:30 GMT

  • Next message: Derek Gatherer: "Dawkins on Channel 4 tonight"

    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/311/5757/34

    "Excerpts from the decision" are at the bottom of the page, including:

    1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation;

    2) The argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s, and;

    3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. It has not generated peer-reviewed publications, nor has it been the subject of testing and research.

    Argument 2 addresses Hoyle's Fallacy, as previously mentioned ad nauseam by me.....

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri 06 Jan 2006 - 14:03:09 GMT