[SalukiLawyer]

Neither evolution nor ID is science in the first place. They are both attempts to explain past events on the basis of limited evidence. To that end they may use science and consult experts. Nothing is actually proved in the way it might be in physics or chemistry. Both are argued, and both have appealing arguments on their behalf. The problem with evolution as it is taught is that it includes (indeeds depends upon) a type of questionable argument called an enthymeme ("the glove don't fit, you must acquit") sprinkled with "magic science dust" to help it sneak by.

It is an absolute historical fact that evolution has been used from the beginning as an engine of destruction of religious faith by some people (not necessarily scientists). It is also a fact that ID is being used as a means of getting Christianity back into public schools. People sometimes get strident on both sides.

If you want to think clearly about evolution, imagine less Einstein and more CSI. This is a forensic question and the issue is currently unresolvable in terms of scientific proof. Materialists and believers will therefore make such arguments as they may on the basis of the evidence. Many modern educated people are, frankly, scared of God. They can take comfort in bad rhetoric posing as "science." As far as what goes on in school, we all know that evolution is taught as a scientific fact, which it is not.

Of course, neither is ID. :-)

[Pete from Shawnee Mission]

Thank you. Physics is science, mathematics is science, chemistry is science. They are uniform, consistent and predictable. They are subject to experimentation and reproducable demonstration.

Agreed that darwinistic evolution involves a good deal of faith, exactly what it charges its critics of using. It has become the religion of science, a scientific "shibboleth."
It was, as you allude to, also used by people like Marx and Hitler to support some of the most damaging and horrific social, and genetic, engineering ever inflicted on humankind.

If we are just a product of a mechanical biochemistry than whatever is, is... There is no right, no wrong. Not really a world even a materialist biochemist would really want to live in.

[Thatcherite]

Nothing is actually proved in the way it might be in physics or chemistry.

You seem to think that the laws and theories of physics and chemistry are more provable than those in biology. Please explain how physics or chemistry proves something. Give a specific example of such a real world proof with full analytical rigour applying to any physical or chemical law or theory of your choice......

I'll wait. I've seen your contention made many times by those who wish to deny the theory of evolution (or to by some mysterious process promote ID to being on equal status with ToE), and when I ask this question the response has been chirping crickets, every time.

[185JHP]

BTTT

[185JHP]

BTTT