Fletis Humplebacker wrote:
"Bruce Barnett"
...


There is a big HUGE difference between ID and evolution.
But you ignored my earlier point.

There is NO way to use ID to predict any results.

I don't think that's true. For example, presuming an omnipetant
intelligent designer one hypothesis might be that there would be
no evolutionary 'dead ends'.

We CAN use evolution to predict results.


You can't predict anything with evolution.

False. Hypothesis testing of competing theories of evolution
is why some come to be favored over others.

An hypothesis entails a prediction. But recall what Niehls Bohr
said about prediction, that it is very difficult, especially
about the future. A prediction, in the sense of an hypothesis
may be made about past events, evidence of which has not yet
been discovered, (e.g. predictions of what may be found in
the fossil record), or current phenomena not yet observed,
which has been happening a lot over the past several decades
in DNA studies.


If evolution was tested and proven in some concrete way it wouldn't
be a hypothesis.

Evolution is not an hypothesis. Evolution is a field of study
within biology. Over the centuries there have been several theories
within that field, those theories spawn hypotheses which can be tested.

... That's
why it's important to give school children an unbiased education.

They should be given a better education about the process of
science.

--

FF