02 Jul '07 16:43>1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou are putting words in my mouth, I did not say that every bit of
Are you saying that every bit of evidence for evolution is faked? If not then you cannot equate the two. No single piece of scientific evidence for ID has ever been verified or stood up to public scrutiny. Any scientific hypothesis which is shown to be based entirely on fraudulent results is either discarded or left as an unproven hypothesis. At no point ...[text shortened]... s, as you claim, a pattern, then that pattern can be described mathematically or scientifically.
evidence for evolution is faked, I did not even hint to that either!
With regard to ID I am a creationist I believe God created the whole
ball of wax when it comes to the universe and all that is in it, so there
are things about ID I agree with, but over all I'd be hard pressed to
call it science too. As I said earlier unless you have eyes to see the
patterns and the 'design', so you'll be hard pressed to give someone
else eyes to see.
The debate with those that agree with ID and those that do not is
simply the perspectives that everyone brings to the table one claims
to see design the other does not, and since those that do not, do not
want to, they will not no matter what is in front of them either.
So you know I do believe life is changing “evolving”, I believe the
starting point began with the creation that God set in motion when
he made life. I do not believe life started from non-life without any
plan, purpose, or design, because I believe it is to complex. I believe
it is much easier, and more logical for life to be altered after it was
all put together than to get where we are today from scratch without
anything other than the laws currently in place, getting life started,
and adding all the various and sundry complexity to each life form
we have around us now. I believe this because it is easier to tweak
a complex system than it is to write one when getting it wrong ends
the system from functioning at all.
Kelly