# ID Inquiry + Infinite Money **URL:** \ **Category:** Side Conversation\ **Tags:** Design\ **Created:** [September 28, 2018, 8:21pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/id-inquiry-infinite-money/1903 "2018-09-28T20:21:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 36

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 8:47pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/id-inquiry-infinite-money/1903/36 "2018-09-29T20:47:17Z")

> [@Mung](#): > > it’s just a dispute over who are what did the designing. Pretty sure that Joshua allows for God’s role in that as well. No. That is not what the dispute is over. The dispute is if any of the specific arguments put forward by ID are (1) valid (factually correct and reasonably warranted) and (2) are fully within science in the language of science by the rules of science. The vast majority of ID arguments appear to be invalid, though I have identified at least 1 exception ([Common Ground on Bad Design](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/common-ground-on-bad-design/1798)). I cannot find a single ID argument however that satisfies 2. That is what the disagreement is, because ID advocates dispute that assessment, and it matters deeply to them. > [@Mung](#): > > > A person who thinks all biological life on Earth was designed and created. > > That would include Joshua Swamidass, wouldn’t it? On this you are correct though. The fact you aren’t gonna be able to instigate a fight between the atheists an me on this point demonstrates the real problem is what I just laid out. No one cares what you personally believe about God if you don’t make bad arguments to that effect and fight to put them in science. --- _[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/id-inquiry-infinite-money/1903)._