Monday, 17 October 2011

No matter what C4ID says, Intelligent Design creationism isn't sciencedoesn't get science

From Wonderful connection with the proposal that Intelligent Design creationism should be legally excluded from inclusion in UK science lessons, a blog article by James Williams, and a weak riposte by Alastair Noble...why C4ID's claims that Intelligent Design creationism is science are wide of the mark.
Dr Alastair Noble has penned a rather defensive article at the C4ID website, in response to James Williams’ recent blog concerning some radio discussions he had had with Noble (Intelligent Design Creationism is not Science). Unlike Williams’ blog (and this one), the C4ID website does not brook any comment, preferring to push their line of reasoning unchallenged.
I have a number of comments and observations relating to the latest Noble epistle and in particular in relation to Intelligent Design creationism as an alternative to an evolutionary explanation of life’s diversity For my rebuttal of many of C4ID’s claims about ID as an alternative to evolutionary biology, see my article “C4ID’s Introduction to Intelligent Design: A critique”.

No comments:

Post a comment