Steve Zara has started a conversation about whether Intelligent Design is science or not on his blog.
Someone pointed out that a specific claim that some biological structure is "irreducibly complex" can be falsified. Therefore, the common assertion that ID is non-falsifiable is wrong.
But hold on. Don't you smell something kinda fishy about this notion of "irreducible complexity"? Perhaps we ought to stop and take a closer look.
When someone declares that a natural structure is irreducibly complex, he's saying effectively, "I have no idea how the hell that got like that." Phrased thusly, it's easy to recognize an old friend: the argument from ignorance.
Notice that the argument from ignorance says something about the speaker, but actually nothing about the object of his remarks.
So yes, I concede that the statement: "I am an effin' moron" is falsifiable.
But I ask, dear reader, does the effort to challenge this hypothesis advance the cause of science?
Hmm. I think not.
The very worst version of the sham known as “right-to-try” is poised to become law - "Right-to-try" laws are a cruel sham that purport to allow terminally ill patients access to promising experimental drugs. In reality, they strip away many...
2 hours ago