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
|Bearing Up (under-pressure)||36||53 minutes ago|
|Global warming is the most serious problem of our generation, part 3||6590||54 minutes ago|
|Knowledge||4619||1 hour ago|
|Origin of Life For Real||3539||1 hour ago|
|Science in Harmony with God||4964||1 hour ago|
|Anarcho-capitalism?||3||2 hours ago|
|Question for F4A||148||3 hours ago|
|prostate removal||163||4 hours ago|
|Creationists ask...What is the Greatest Question faced by Origin of Life Scientists?||19||8 hours ago|
|Nephilim is uncovered||14||10 hours ago|
|Why Does Earth's Atmosphere Move Along With It? Gravity?||99||10 hours ago|
|Will the leap second tomorrow crash your systems?||13||12 hours ago|