The alchemist: For someone who has never seen God. For someone who has never spoken to God. For someone who, evidently, has never studied about God you sure "know" a lot about God eh!
You seem to have a typical evolutionists picture? of God.
As for you creationists who have God "guiding?" evolution, seems that you are a little ashamed of your belief in God so are having two bob each way.
It does say in the Bible, "He who says there is no God is a fool" As God describes Himself as the Creator you two bob each wayers are on thin ice indeed.
alchemist look at nature, look at the heavens, and explain what life is really is. numbat

Brian this would have to be one of the silliest explanation of evolution I've ever read. Unfortunately it's not uncommon, this debate is out of all proportion that it deserves no scientist working in the field entertains ID and nor should anyone being taught the subject. ID is a religious world view held by a small number of religious people mainly American right wing extremist. It contains bad science and bad theology and it's main backers are members of the American extreme religious right who having lost the creationist battle have reinvented themselves and are trying again. Let the science decide what the origin of life is not public opinion or religious dogma.

Let the ID devotees convince the scientific world before arguing their case with the rest of us the fact that they want to do it the other way points to their real agenda. After all we don't teach kids string theory!

alchemist,
your suggestion that "god" would be either in our dimension or in another is paradoxical.
It explicitly says that "god" would be contained. This suggests that "god" is bound by laws of the dimension He inhabits. This suggests higher powers than God. This negates any possibility of Divinity.

"I AM Who AM" (Exodus: one of the early chapters)
God is not "within a universe", but the universe is within God.

Know this:
When it is said that we are made in the image and likeness of God, it means we have an Intellect and a Will (cognition and connation).

numbat,
Saying that evolution is guided by God is not "bobbing each way". It is not in any way contrary to the suggestion that the universe was created.

Which brings me back again, anyone brave enough to suggest a law preventing the occurence of a second Big Bang in your back yard this afternoon?

Kenny,
Behe is a scientist working in the field who thinks ID is correct based on the evidence. There are many others (although still a significant minority). Is your case so weak that you need to make false statements to support it?

"ID is a religious world view held by a small number of religious people mainly American right wing extremist."

Actually kenny, over 80% of the american population believe that ID is correct. I wouldn't call that a 'small number'. Why the constant need to overstate your case?

As for ID being religious, you have yet to prove that contention. Simply stating it does not make you case. You need to actually make an argument, not just make bald assertions.

No one hear has any reason to accept your opinion as authoritative or correct, and you have not given any reason for them to do so. The same applies equally to deuc's post of 'basic facts'. Make an argument for your position. That is what discussion is really about. It is in that way that we can actually come to a conclusion about who is wrong and who is right. Surely you think this issue is important enough to discuss to find out the truth?

Is is enlightening to read the avalanch of Posts both for and against Intelligent Design. But permssion to ask a couple of questions.

Has intelligent design been stolen off Aristotle, whose conception of the Great Architect of the Universe, also used by Freemasonry as a deistic interpretation of some sort of Great Mind behind all creation. But not so much as a humanistic-style God writ large in the sky?

Also because intelligent design is so similar to the Great Architect conception which was also taken up early in the Age of Enlightenment by many great thinkers such as Francis Bacon, Rene Descartes, Isaac Newton, Voltaire and the French Philosophes, whom incidently did excite the philosophies that helped to found America, but not so much today's American leadership.

Still and all, we could guess that the most important question is, if intelligent design is so much like the deist-style theory that began to evolve early in the 17th century, because at the time it was also part of a scientific doctrine, are these creationists abusing their beliefs pertaining to both old and New Testaments, for example the story of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden - also concerning the young Jesus and his connection with the Holy Royal Line of King David of the Old Testament beliefs?

Might get a few science fiction fans on the job?

Regards,

George C, WA - Bushbred

grey, can you enlighten us on some of the predictions of 'creation science'? and im not refering to any kind of predictions of events justified after the act, in the style of nostradamus, but rather testable scientific predictions (given ...... then ...... will result) which are repeatable.