Who cares what India thinks:
Note: they are a ton of brilliant scientists, engineers, and mathematicians in India. This was just a frustrating story.
1 Like
The term is different but meaning is the same
Functional Sequence Complexity (FSC).
Jack W. Szostak, (2003) Functional information: Molecular messages. Nature vol. 423 (6941),p 689 (June 12, 2003).
In fact, I was wrong, it actually does cover some of these countries:
This statement include signatories such as the Kenyan National Academy of Sciences, Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, etc.
Maybe instead of expecting us to show you all the scientific organisations around the world that reject ID, you could show us those that accept it?
Then it is quite easy for evolution to produce CSI. All you need is for a functional gene to be passed down to multiple lineages.
2 Likes
The Council of Europe is not all scientific institutions in Europe, Europe is not the United States of Europe, They are integrated economically, some politically, but it does not mean that there is high power that speaks of in the name of all scientists in Europe
If you’re going to claim CSI = FSC you’ve already lost as known evolutionary processes are empirically observed to produce new FSC.
Game over, thanks for playing. 
5 Likes
in that statement there is nothing about rejecting ID, in fact with that statmenet i also agree and would sign it
I agree with the bold statement, therefore the claim that the scientific community rejected ID is false claim, it rather a small circle of academics in the USA rejected ID, more correct way to say
There are at least two statements which reject the idea of teaching ID
We, the undersigned Academies of Sciences, have learned that in various parts of the world,within science courses taught in certain public systems of education, scientific evidence, data,and testable theories about the origins and evolution of life on Earth are being concealed,denied, or confused with theories not testable by science. We urge decision makers, teachers, andparents to educate all children about the methods and discoveries of science and to foster anunderstanding of the science of nature. Knowledge of the natural world in which they liveempowers people to meet human needs and protect the planet.
Scientific knowledge derives from a mode of inquiry into the nature of the universe that has been successful and of great consequence. Science focuses on (i) observing the natural world and (ii) formulating testable and refutable hypotheses to derive deeper explanations for observable phenomena. When evidence is sufficiently compelling, scientific theories are developed that account for and explain that evidence, and predict the likely structure or process of still unobserved phenomena
You already told us above ID makes no testable hypotheses so what is your gripe about ID being deemed not science?
3 Likes
I didn’t say that it “speaks in the name of all scientists in Europe”, but to an extent it represents a consensus, having passed a vote by PACE, whose members would have been advised by their respective scientific organisations.
1 Like
What do you think the “confused with theories not testable by science” was referring to?
no, I did not say that, I said that we have different definitions of what it means ‘’ ID hypotheses’’
Come on, even if you don’t want to extend it to the whole scientific community, it’s disingenuous to pretend that it’s literally just American academics that have rejected ID, much less a “small circle”.
If all you can argue about is what people say about ID and what people say it, then it demonstrates our point for us. ID isn’t science.
1 Like
Go ahead and list all the professional science organizations in the world which support Intelligent Design of biological life. Besides the DI (which isn’t anywhere close to being a science organization) I bet you can’t name a single one.
Ball’s in your court.
I sign with this statement, complete agreement,
When asked to list a few of ID’s testable hypotheses you said there were none. Did you manage to think of some since then? Please post them.
1 Like
Then you agree ID is not scientific and shouldn’t be taught in science classrooms.
no, i said define what ID hypotheses mean to you, you did not define it
The American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of University Professors
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Physics
American Psychological Association
American Society of Agronomy
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Botanical Society of America
Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology
National Association of Biology Teachers
The National Center for Science Education
The National Science Teachers Association
United States National Academy of Sciences
1 Like