Michael Behe says, ". . . the fundamental mechanisms of life cannot be ascribed to natural selection, and therefore were designed."
Couldn't the opposite be asserted just as easily? "The fundamental mechanisms of life cannot be ascribed to design, and therefore were naturally selected?" Why must evolution be held up to severe logical scrutiny, while the alternative -- a designer and creator -- is not?
If ID is to compete as a scientific explanation for life's origins, shouldn't it be required to justify the mechanism of the Creator's power? How exactly does a being design and create life? What chemical & physical steps are involved? Why aren't those valid scientific objections?
I don't agree that there are any truly "irreducibly complex" phenomena in nature, but if there were, I would argue that a designer could no more be postulated without evidence than a series of successive variations could be.
Proponents of Intelligent Design, how do you respond to that?
2007-03-09
10:09:27
·
4 answers
·
asked by
Ben H
4