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
|Since no contact is possible, does it make sense to keep trying?||345||12 minutes ago|
|spherical earth vs. flat earth||4837||23 minutes ago|
|Science in Harmony with God||7011||32 minutes ago|
|Global warming is the most serious problem of our generation, part 4 (reboot)||7020||1 hour ago|
|Don't eat produce from any Portland school garden, officials warn||37||1 hour ago|
|Limericks-sort of?||109||3 hours ago|
|See that, they can soon stop burning all that filthy diesel fuel! Get more in operation?||5||4 hours ago|
|Back To The Beginning||8||4 hours ago|
|ANOD4U2C.||87||4 hours ago|
|Re-Thinking Nuclear Energy||252||4 hours ago|
|What Are The Prospects For A Quickly Developed Zika Virus Vaccine?||11||4 hours ago|
|Archaeology Plus Other Fohrbidden Sciences.||1079||5 hours ago|