"Creation science" is a contradiction in terms. A central tenet of modern science is methodological naturalism, it seeks to explain the universe purely in terms of observed or testable natural mechanisms. Thus, physics describes the atomic nucleus with specific concepts governing matter and energy, and it tests those descriptions experimentally. Physicists introduce new particles, such as quarks, to flesh out their theories only when data show that the previous descriptions cannot adequately explain observed phenomena. These particles do not have arbitrary properties, moreover--their definitions are tightly constrained, because the new particles must fit within the existing framework of physics.
In contrast, intelligent-design theorists invoke shadowy entities that conveniently have whatever unconstrained abilities are needed to solve the mystery. Rather than expanding scientific inquiry, such answers shut it down. (How does one disprove the existence of omnipotent intelligence..?)
2007-06-15
00:20:52
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Religion & Spirituality