Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − − Advocates of [[methodological naturalism]], vigorously oppose ID theory. Particular opposition comes from proponents of the materialistic [[Theory of evolution]]. [http://www.discovery.org/csc/topQuestions.php] − − A sticking point for many of these opponents that ID leaves the identity of the intelligent cause open. Some arguments against ID are: − #that there could not be a designer without an [[infinite regress]] of designers. − #that it is illegitimate for ID proponents to conceal their religious beliefs about the Intelligent Designer − − − [http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1341]. However, some proponents admit to believing the intelligent cause to be [[God]].
moving poorly formatted material - which I myself messed up a bit - to talk page
Intelligent Design (ID) is the theory that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause.
Intelligent Design (ID) is the theory that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause.
Recently, there have been articles which were favorable to the intelligent design position in scientific journals which traditionally have favored the macroevolutionary position. [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640]
Recently, there have been articles which were favorable to the intelligent design position in scientific journals which traditionally have favored the macroevolutionary position. [http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2640]