# The Flickering Flame of Intelligent Design - Christianity Today

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432>\
**Category:** Conversation\
**Tags:** Design\
**Created:** [September 14, 2025, 12:48am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432 "2025-09-14T00:48:56Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Dan\_Eastwood](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dan_eastwood/32/2368_2.png) [@Dan\_Eastwood](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Dan_Eastwood)\
**Post date:** [September 19, 2025, 8:02pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432/21 "2025-09-19T20:02:28Z")

</div>

> [@AdrianB](#):
>
> I think one of the difficulties with intelligent design is that no one really knows what it means.

_Exactly this._

There is no hypothesis for Intelligent Design, nothing to define it, and no way to test it.

At risk of piling on …

> [@Giltil](#):
>
> Questioning scientific « wisdom » is quintessential to the scientific spirit.

And the way to do that is to test assumptions, validate conclusions, and to propose an alternative wisdom (a new hypothesis or theory) with might advance the current state of knowledge. ID does not test it’s own assumptions, cannot be validated (it’s not even clear what “validation” would mean in this context), and has very little to offer in the way of new hypotheses. _It is the very antithesis of the scientific spirit._

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mercer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Mercer](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Mercer)\
**Post date:** [September 22, 2025, 1:00pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432/22 "2025-09-22T13:00:35Z")

</div>

> [@Giltil](#):
>
> Questioning scientific « wisdom » is quintessential to the scientific spirit. Science thrives by challenging assumptions.

The IDcreationist movement isn’t doing so. They are deliberately ignoring most of the evidence and lying about a big chunk of it.

Their alleged assumptions are straw men.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mercer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Mercer](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Mercer)\
**Post date:** [September 22, 2025, 5:38pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432/23 "2025-09-22T17:38:03Z")

</div>

> [@AdrianB](#):
>
> I think one of the difficulties with intelligent design is that no one really knows what it means.

It definitely is a way to solicit donations from people using tribal appeals.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/peacefulscience/original/2X/6/6b7bf72453a5c60b0919b6b89a27dc18bc52382c.png) [@system](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/system)\
**Post date:** [September 29, 2025, 5:38pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432/24 "2025-09-29T17:38:42Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

[Previous page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/the-flickering-flame-of-intelligent-design-christianity-today/17432.md?page=1)