Scientists using science, that is, scientific method? Or scientists simply resorting to the old argument from design and not using science?
The fact is the people you refer to have been debunked by the scientific community and ID itself has been exposed as junk science in at least one court case.
As I said, I have no problem with theology and I obviously have none with science. I have a major problem with those who want to dress up theology as science when it patently isn't.
Are you under the impression that it is a COURT that can determine science? Wow, what a throwback to Galileo's time. Yeah, a court led by some atheist or ultraliberal judge is surely the best way to decide science. Just like a court led by some Catholic bishop was the best way to determine science in the past.
We have lived under a materialism paradigm for nearly 200 years now. A paradigm is the perspective we use to organize and observe the information we collect. Unlike scientific theories, a paradigm cannot be first tested for accuracy. It is tested by applying it and it continues until a paradigm shift. Paradigm shifts occur when we are confronted with something that cannot possibly be explained or comprehended under the current one and our perspective is forced to change in order to try and comprehend it.
A materialism paradigm says that EVERYTHING, every possible fact, everything seen and unseen or known to exist in whatever form it exists, without exception, even human history - in our universe is causally dependent on physical processes and reducible to those physical processes.
More and more scientists are coming to the realization that there is something wrong with this paradigm. It includes everything - yet that means including intangibles that have NO material substance, no physical process and no physical measurement. Will and self-awareness are also part of our universe and everyone KNOWS they exist -for a fact. But since they have no material substance, it cannot possibly be explained, measured or comprehended under a materialism perspective.
If our materialism paradigm were THE true perspective of reality, then humans SHOULD be nothing but biological computers with no self-awareness and lacking free will. All actions of a human would be due to nothing but a set of responses to environmental pressures and corresponding chemical changes within the body. With enough knowledge, those responses would be entirely predictable and measurable for any possible combination of environmental pressures and internal chemical processes for any and all humans. Just as once we know the operating system of any computer, we can accurately predict how a computer will respond to any typed commands. In fact, this is exactly how Darwin viewed all life. Life is nothing but bags of biological processes meaninglessly responding to environmental pressures.
A materialism paradigm cannot possibly explain intangibles we know exist -but have no material substance to them whatsoever. Things like free will, conciousness and self-awareness. That means there is a flaw with our current paradigm that has already attempted to include and explain such intangibles, but never can.
If we are still unable to comprehend something under a current paradigm -then the paradigm itself is flawed -NOT that which we are trying to comprehend.
There are scientists whose goal is a paradigm shift in order to comprehend those things we know exist but cannot possibly understand with a materialism paradigm. And SHOULD try to comprehend because we know for a FACT that such intangibles have a tremendous impact and play a significant role in the material world. Self-awareness, will and conciousness are an integral part of life itself, life clearly is NOT just a bag of biological processes meaninglessly responding to environmental pressures as this paradigm insists. Self-awareness, conciousness and will are not even necessary for life, no creature needs selfl-awareness to respond to environmental pressures any more than a computer needs self-awareness to respond to typed commands.
Worse yet, these intangibles are proven NOT to be due to a physical process. You can remove either half of a person's brain and their self-awareness, conciousness and will exist untouched. Just like chopping off your arm doesn't change any of those either. Only the ability to properly operate the body is changed by removing half the brain. And we have NO explanation for why that is true under THIS paradigm. If this paradigm were THE true perspective on reality, then it insists that self-awareness is a physical process. If that were true, then removing half the brain should leave a person with HALF the self-awareness, half the will and half the conciousness. But it doesn't. This paradigm fails to allow us to comprehend those intangibles. Yet those intangibles play a significant role in our material world. Are they NOT worth comprehending or what? The fact our current paradigm cannot possibly include such nonphysical things -means our paradigm is much too narrow.
Those stuck on a materialism paradigm, convinced it is THE only true perspective of reality possible -will resist any paradigm shift. Those convinced their current paradigm was THE only true perspective of reality have always resisted throughout history. But because we cannot comprehend such intangibles with our current paradigm is THE proof it is too narrow of a perspective. This paradigm will never allow us to comprehend such intangibles and the intellectually honest admit it. But it still makes sense somehow to many people to demand we stick with it anyway and denounce any and all who offer a theory that falls outside the current, but flawed paradigm. Resisting the need to change one's perspective in order to comprehend something always makes good science, doesn't it?
