Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
Once we have even more evidence that is irreputable in supporting the theory of evolution - such as developing life from non life, or actually creating a new species that cannot reproduce with what it has come from (in a lab under controlled circumstances) - people may calm down about it a bit.
|
Both these have already been accomplished. We've been able to create perfectly functional, living, evolving viruses in the lab for over a decade now, plus new plant species have been created numerous times that were not capable of reproducing with their progenitors.
The problem here is that no amount of "evidence" can, even in theory, refute the ID hypothesis. That's because ID is supernatural. It is outside and above all natural laws, theories, observation. This allows an ID supporter to say "Whatever you observed was orchestrated by the ID. It's not nature that you're observing or gathering evidence about, its the ID." That's why it's never possible, even in theory, to "disprove" ID. To do so, ID has to contradict natural law. But ID by definition is above and outside natural law, so it has the ability to do anything without contradicting it.
Science is incapable of saying anything whatsoever, pro or con, about a supernatural agency, because that agency operates outside science.