Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbird
None, that's always been my point. I do not have any intention of promoting I.D. Complexity is not I.D. But some in ID have used it to promote ID some on this forum do not understand that complexity is not about ID, therefore the confusion is not on my part. I was studying complexity long before ID began to be misused it as a wedge issue which is not my intent, but others. Read Stuart Kauffman he applies complexity to evolution properly.
|
I apologize, T-bird. I don't want to appear to be implying that you have promoted I.D. I will attest that you have continually denied Intelligent Design or any other form of Creationism.
What I meant was that you have suggested, I believe, that there are inherent qualities in nature that lend themselves toward increasing complexity, which has been challenged as teleological putting you in the position of defending youself. Even Eclogite acknowledged that simply dismissing something as teleological was scientifically closed-minded, if I recall correctly.
I think in some of those discussions that you provided some very valuable information to consider. I was trying to clarify why some of the discussions you were involved in regarding evolution found their way toward a debate about creationism.
I admit that there are some itchy trigger fingers when it comes to creationists around here. I tend to think that's because of the shear number of posters over the years that have come here to proselytize.
