If the hypothesis you want to test in an experiment is that evolution could happen without the actions of an Intelligent Designer, so that you can claim a victory for atheism and materialism, ANY INTELLIGENT DESIGN THAT GOES INTO THAT EXPERIMENT IS MADE RELEVANT TO YOUR OUTCOME BY THE CLAIM ABOUT INTELLIGENT DESIGN NOT BEING NEEDED. Your goals and claim have made that intelligent design relevant to the outcome and not honestly left out of any claims about what you've actually done.
YOUR EXPERIMENT REQUIRED AN INTELLIGENT DESIGN, no matter how unintelligent your choice to ignore its presence in what you did was because you give the proponents of intelligent design an ability to make a totally legitimate point that what happened in your experiment happened through the intelligent design that produced the results. Your results wouldn't have happened without the presence and action of an intelligent designer, you've only proven that an effect CAN happen through the action of an intelligent designer.
Though that is exactly what some eminent scientists, such atheist ideologues within science, have been doing for more than sixty years with complete success, inserting their ideology directly into science in exactly the same way that any insertion of religion into science would, rightly, be rejected. Atheism and materialism are only dwarfed by the pollution that money and the interest of the wealthy - the military industrial complex, plays in science.
Any experiment conducted to make assertions about the origin of life on Earth or about the "mechanism" of evolution cannot escape the inclusion of intelligent design and so any experiment that can be conducted cannot disprove intelligent design in the origin and evolution of life on Earth. Science can neither confirm or disconfirm the necessity of intelligent design in either the origin of life or evolution. You would have to remove both intelligence and design from science to do that and, though the claims of atheist-materialists are far from intelligent, even to make that error in analysis requires flawed intelligence and design.
Science can't do that, scientists can't do that, though they can lie about what they've actually done. Even that lying required intelligence and design.
No comments:
Post a Comment