Daily Archives: 10/09/2011
Steve Matheson (a Reformed Chistian, like myself) started an interesting thread on his website a couple of months ago, which stemmed from a conversation with Casey Luskin. (Cunning link to my previous post – see what I did there?) His argument was that Intelligent Design Theory is inherently unfalsifiable unless one specifies the character and limitations of the designer, because an omniscient designer such as God could (and of course, in both his and my view, did) design everything. Since that could include designing the incontrovertible appearance of non-design, nothing could be excluded from the possibility of design, design would therefore be unfalsifiable and design theory ergo unscientific.
I’ve chanced upon another reference to my post about Signature in the Cell, this time from Casey Luskin on Evolution News and Views. As a blogger I’m very aware of the dictum that “No publicity is bad publicity”, since the previous mention on Uncommon Descent boosted my readership from about three to … rather more. So if Casey’s post brings you here, then welcome. Do say hello.