Tim Daneliuk (in ) said:

| Renata wrote:
|
|| While the origin of the universe may matter to science, ID as the
|| explanation fails to follow the scientific method and thus, fails
|| to be in the realm science. (simply put)
|
| Go back and read the rest of the thread. ID fails only to follow
| the scope of science *as currently defined*. ID is trying to
| get traction (in part) by arguing that the first propositions
| of science are in incorrect (i.e. philosophical materialism).

This is like saying: "If I had some meatballs I could have spaghetti
and meatballs - if I had some spaghetti."

If you let me re-write the constitution I could be king - if I could
write. :-)

If you want to play "science", then you have to play by "science"
rules as currently defined.

If you aren't playing by "science" rules, you're playing some other
game - and if you take the rules for "science" and make arbitrary
changes, then you've created a new game which may resemble "science"
(or not) but that new game isn't "science".

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html