Jon writes:
There is absolutely nothing in this topic about knowing God.
And that's what frustrates I.D. proponents. They can not nor will not imagine a universe where God is irrelevant.
When I think about it, it makes me a bit queasy as well. I can accept the premise, however. The SOURCE (Designer) is unimportant. The CONTENT (all that can be subject to testing) is the basis of the arguments. For this reason, I don't accept I.D. as valid science since it conflicts with the mainstream established science already published.
I simply don't believe that
some scientists are approaching the methodology all wrong while others are apparently enlightened due to awareness of a "Source."
Dirk writes:
The existence or non-existence of a designer does in no way change anything we already know about the world. Evolution by means of random mutation, natural selection etc. takes place, so if life was really designed with a plan, evolution must have been part of that plan (or the plan went wrong).
I agree. How the universe came into existence can be examined without need of referral to the SOURCE of the existence.(unless we are all somehow deluded)
Edited by Phat, : added features!