I think D assumes far too much in this proposition. I can imagine designed body forms that subsequently develop haphazardly in nature. I can imagine heritable alterations of DNA caused by cellular, extra-cellular or environmental events. I can entertain the idea of speciation of designed forms.

I don’t claim to have empirical evidence of the above. Situation: contingent. State of knowledge: fluid. But please note that D’s proposition implies that he DOES claim empirical evidence, i.e., in his use of the term “exhaustive.” Clearly D has no such exhaustive evidence. Therefore his claim of mutual exclusivity is false. D describes a rhetorical, not a logical, battle when referencing negative argumentations in this instance.

Dembski saysID has this advantage, however. We do know that intelligent agents can bring about the types of functional systems we see in biology; we have no evidence that unintelligent evolution can do the same.

It doesn’t seem to matter how much you belabor that point. Some people just don’t get it. We replicate all kinds of irreducibly complex things chock full of CSI and we designed it all too. There is only one other example in nature of this kind of self-replicating CSI it’s in organic living cells. The example of CSI where we KNOW the source is intelligent agency. How stupid is it to assume that the only other example is NOT intelligent agency. Like duh!

Totally espousing RM&NS isn’t the puzzling part – lots of TE folks hold that view, and it is considered valid orthodoxy in Christian circles. The puzzling part is what I’ve heard him say about the eye. What’s up with that?

He says the eye was terribly designed due to the wiring and was therefore evidence of evolution. So, what does he think happened as a committed Catholic? Did God set up the first causes, hoping that it would eventually lead to mankind, but not really sure things would turn out that way? Was God just as ‘lucky’ as we are that we eventually got here? His whole eye argument seems to indicate that God had no control over it, and that is why the eye is ‘badly’ designed. For, if it was designed by God, surely he would have done a better job.

Now, this blog has discussed the eye on numerous occasions, so I don’t want to rehash that argument. What I really want to figure out is where is Miller coming from with his theology, when he sees the eye as a chance creation, and done rather badly. Does this mean, in Miller’s view, that if things didn’t work out well, we might all be walking around with light sensitive spots on our heads, and God would be sitting back with his hands tied?

Fantastic!
“We do know that intelligent agents can bring about the types of functional systems we see in biology; we have no evidence that unintelligent evolution can do the same.”

I think Darwinian Evolution is in exactly the same shape the Titantic was in immediately after the gigantic iceberg ripped a fatal into its abdomen just below the water line. For a time, the ship continued to float on its merry voyage; the passengers danced and enjoyed their cabins; the band still played. But the ship’s mates in the boiler room knew something was terribly wrong; the logic of the North Sea had already doomed the ship to the bottom of the Atlantic.

It was only a matter of time.

Speaking of Ken Miller, do you know the exact time and date of your upcoming debate at Case Western?

The ‘negative argument’ rhetoric reminds me of another lame argument, If we did not have evolution scientist – we would never have any breakthroughs in science. Or our sicence journals would be empty – phhhhffft. As if science would stop.

I remind them of Mendel, a monk – go figure, he raised his hands and eyes to G_d. Based on the aformentioned false logic of evolution proponents, we cannot have genetics since Mendel was a Christian. By far, Mendel’s laws contribute more to science. He actually applied experimentation, observation and math.

Darwin gave us beaks that change back and forth. He gave us observation of variation within a species. This is important, but then he stretched out the hand of god-man and declared his own creation.