Science isn't in the business of refuting ID. I would guess that a slight majority of scientists probably think ID is true, at this point. The vast majority of all scientists, however, would not for a moment think that ID has even begun to put its money where its mouth is in terms of putting up a theory with sufficient detail to provide for a single falsifiable test of any significant practical scientific viability. It took discrepencies in the perhilion of mercury to take Einstein's theory off the drawing board. No such equivalent test has even been proposed for ID, much less been performed.
Finally we agree. Now just tell that to all the Evo's that claim ID has been refuted.
I would guess that a slight majority of scientists probably think ID is true, at this point.
Well, that statement was unexpected.
The vast majority of all scientists, however, would not for a moment think that ID has even begun to put its money where its mouth is in terms of putting up a theory with sufficient detail to provide for a single falsifiable test of any significant practical scientific viability.
All right - what's going on here? I agree 100% but would also like to note that natural selection is not falsifiable.
It took discrepencies in the perhilion of mercury to take Einstein's theory off the drawing board. No such equivalent test has even been proposed for ID, much less been performed.
Darn, you have ruined this entire debate - I completely agree with you.