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
|Our universe vs. the universe||64||39 minutes ago|
|spherical earth vs. flat earth||2239||4 hours ago|
|String Theory||1||4 hours ago|
|LED CCT||14||4 hours ago|
|I remember when the science forum addressed science, such as it is.||9||5 hours ago|
|why the science forum is pointless and dominated by ignorance||845||5 hours ago|
|Don't forget to take your vitamins.||186||5 hours ago|
|Global warming is the most serious problem of our generation, part 4 (reboot)||5888||5 hours ago|
|Archaeology Plus Other Fohrbidden Sciences.||375||6 hours ago|
|Real Methods to build Great Pyramids uncovered||37||7 hours ago|
|The Science Behind Fetal Pain-related Abortion Legislation||673||11 hours ago|
|Tesla deliveries, and lost money on every one!||363||12 hours ago|