I am not convinced that the intelligent design hypothesis qualifies as legitimate science. Neither are these 38 Nobel Laureates: http://media.ljworld.com/pdf/2005/09/15/nobel_letter.pdf In light of this, I hope there are some intelligent design advocates out there that can make a convincing case. Please, without relying on religious rhetoric, answer these questions:
1. What, specifically, do intelligent design advocates hypothesize? On what observation is this hypothesis based?
2. What data has been collected to support the hypothesis?
3. How is the hypothesis falsifiable?
4. How would you respond to the criticism that intelligent design appears to be a theory drawn up to support an ideology, rather than to explain observable phenomena?
5. An important characteristic of a scientific theory is that it cannot be proven correct. Instead, it is meant to function as a logical, predictive model. Why do so many intelligent design advocates, then, present their theory as "fact?"
2007-01-09
14:52:47
·
18 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous