Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonest@r
in the case Dover and DI, YES. I refute the Dover adequetly represents ID as proposed by Philip Johnson...
|
How, exactly? The book that was introduced in the schools came from the Discovery Institute, which Philip Johnson founded, and supports, as Van Rijn said just above. How is the brand of Intelligent Design that is promoted by the Discovery Institute different from that of Philip Johnson?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonest@r
Nothing related to Dover.... Like I said, I came here to understand why ID, though not scientific, is outright refused as an explanation, even though it maybe considered 'philisophical/idealogical', given the complexity of nature..........
|
As Van Rijn said just now, and as we've all posted above, ID has nothing useful to add to science, philosophy or
even theology. Do you have
any evidence to the contrary? You haven't yet provided any, while we've provided plenty of evidence in support.