Where? in Bio-Complexity?
1 Like
@gbrooks9 George, your logic baffles me. There must be a missing âdo notâ in that last sentence.
As for the rest, having declined, not once, but twice, I shall refuse to answer
thrice.
1 Like
In an attempt to clarify what you mean so as to engage in potentially fruitful dialogue. Why are you here?
And yet you say you are willing to accept it. What exactly are you willing to accept?
It isnât clear why you are refusing to answer. How often do you encounter a scientist whoâs afraid to tell people her hypotheses? It canât be because youâre afraid of the effect on your career; thatâs out of the bag already. It canât be because you have some secret research that must not beâŚwell that must not be something. Iâm at a loss.
2 Likes
Having been bitten more than once⌠I am here for fruitful dialog. And you?
2 Likes
If you donât mind me politely asking, fruitful dialog on what? I assumed it was on ID and was happy to have an ID expert here to answer questions but answers about ID have been rather difficult to come by.
1 Like
Rather than loiter over the question i have thrice asked, Iâll explain my earlier comments on Behe:
If ID creationists were in the habit of distinguishing between âIntelligent Designâ and âGod-as-Designerâ, they would not automatically assume Behe favors de novo Adam and Eve!!
In fact, my discovery that Behe more than likely endorses only Guided Common Descent came when @colewd provided a Behe interview link which ColeWD believed would explain Special Creation as the BEST scenario.
Imagine my surprise when careful listening revealed that the darling of ID creationists around the world didnt mention a single word in favor of Special Creation.
You wonât get anything fruitful out of refusing to state your position.
2 Likes
I find it difficult to imagine your surprise. Behe has always, repeatedly and clearly, expressed his agreement with common descent.
2 Likes
@John_Harshman (cc: @agauger)
Part of the great confidence you use to make that statement comes from the discussion i triggered by pointing out Behe promoted Guided Evolution in that interview!! ⌠not Special Creation!
Even then, Eddie was adamant (and still is!) that Behe was only speaking hypothetically!
@John_Harshman I never said I accepted front loading.
Hear hear.
2 Likes
@Agauger (cc to @John_Harshman)
I can offer support for your view on âfront loadingâ.
Any Christian who holds to the miraculous birth and resurrection of Jesus must, by definition, reject any âhardâ version of a âfront-loaded universeâ.
1 Like
@John_Harshman
I have waited for a private response. and received none. So rather than wait around, I am going to go on and do other work.
2 Likes
I assure you it does not. Heâs been up front about this ever since Darwinâs Black Box, maybe before.
Sure, and so was Bill. But I hope you wonât judge by their standards.
1 Like
What view? What do you think that view is?
I was referring to this:
What did you mean by âfront-loadedâ in that sentence?
1 Like
Just wondering - do you still have the t-shirt?
1 Like
Seems to be a tacit admission ID just doesnât care about the when and where and how questions concerning Design that every other science strives to answer. Thatâs because ID isnât science, itâs religious apologetics. As long as the Christian God is given credit in public school science classrooms the ID side is happy.
What did Dembski say about " itâs not IDâs task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories"?
1 Like
So now I am surprised at how well informed you say you were about the nuances of I.D. advocates⌠considering how little you seemed to grasp when you first arrived at PeacefulScience.Org
Ill just chalk it up to you being some kind savant - - where you know a great many things but have difficulies expressing what you know.