Quote:
|
Originally Posted by madsenj37
Just because something is refuted, does not mean it does not have some standing. I am interested in ID that has scientific proof, not faith based claims.
|
generally when something has been refuted, it does mean that it has no standing. as far as ID's claims about specific and irreducable complexity, those have no standing and are not worth continually discussing. it's like someone continuing to want to discuss a flat earth even after pictures of a spherical earth have been shown to them... a waste of time.
and as lebell said, there is no scientific proof for ID, you have to take it all on faith. and that just isnt' science.