I wish to present a challenge to the Intelligent Design supporters on this forum. Since clearly one of the biggest problems in discussions of the subject is the lack of clear definitions for the terms used, I propose (or more accurately challenge) proponents to do three things here in this forum.
1) provide a definition of the terms of intelligent design.
These terms that require a definition include (but may not be limited to) "irreducible complexity" and "design".
2) Provide a statement of the theory of intelligent design.
3) use the above statement to make a scientific prediction.
Quoting form external sources is legitimate as long as the link is provided, (ie, no plagiarizing). Expect the definitions, statement of the theory, and prediction(s) to be held to a scientific standard. For example, to meet my challenge a statement must follow the logical structure of a scientific theory. In short, if you want it to be treated as science, present as science.
Recent discussions in the Science forum
|Creationism and the Fine Structure Constant||79||3 hours ago|
|Since no contact is possible, does it make sense to keep trying?||214||4 hours ago|
|Science Magazine on Fine Tuning||47||4 hours ago|
|Sugar or Fat?||21||5 hours ago|
|Calling Dr Carl Sagan Where are those 1 million Advanced Civilizations?||29||5 hours ago|
|The Creationist Definition of Entropy||28||5 hours ago|
|Atheists in denial of being less intelligent than analytical thinking theists||234||6 hours ago|
|Bose Einstein Condensates||10||6 hours ago|
|Poor President Obama, and his Energy Policy||1||7 hours ago|
|Tesla deliveries, and lost money on every one!||160||9 hours ago|
|Zirka Virus?||7||10 hours ago|
|Disasters||35||12 hours ago|