PvM posted Entry 2956 on March 4, 2007 06:09 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/2946
Briant Trent, professional essayist, screenwriter and novelist, reports in the American Chronicle on a question he asked Intelligent Design proponent Jonathan Wells during the Cato Insitute sponsored debate between Shermer and Wells.
His simple question, and Wells’ answer shows the scientific vacuity of Intelligent Design. So what was the question? Brian asked Wells what his alternative to the evidence for natural selection was
“I don’t think I’m obligated to propose an alternate theory,” Wells publicly stated. “I don’t pretend to have an alternate theory that explains the history of life.”
Briant Trent observes
ID-Creationists are slick tacticians; having failed with the direct approach, they now try to piggyback in under the banner of science. But again, they don’t have a theory. They have a perspective that a designer must be responsible for what we see around us. And that’s not scientific theory, method, or anything remotely considered science.
First Dembski, now Wells… Seems even ID proponents seem to understand how scientifically vacuous their ideas really are.
Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.