11.1.1
kairosfocus
December 19, 2011 at 5:46 am
PS: If you want a theory of design [ID is not that, it is a theory of inference to design (design being a fact of observation) as causal source on validated empirical signs], please cf TRIZ, as has been pointed out several times.
From here:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/id-foundations/answering-petrushkas-assertion-and-dr-recs-underlying-claims-are-id-arguments-reducible-to-dubious-analogies-and-after-the-fact-painting-of-targets-where-arrows-happened-to-hit/comment-page-1/#comment-412409
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, so ID is "a theory of inference to design", not the design inference, or the design hypothesis, or the design theory, or the theory of design, and since gordo-the-bloviator claims that it has been pointed out several times it must be true, even though he's the only one who has described it that way. What the fuck is a theory of inference? Is it the same as 'god-did-it'?
And of course he claims: "design being a fact of observation) as causal source on validated empirical signs" even though it's no such thing. It's all in his (and the other IDiots') feeble, delusional minds.
Isn't it interesting that gordo never even tries to get his bloviating word salad published in a legitimate scientific journal?
kairosfocus
December 19, 2011 at 5:46 am
PS: If you want a theory of design [ID is not that, it is a theory of inference to design (design being a fact of observation) as causal source on validated empirical signs], please cf TRIZ, as has been pointed out several times.
From here:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/id-foundations/answering-petrushkas-assertion-and-dr-recs-underlying-claims-are-id-arguments-reducible-to-dubious-analogies-and-after-the-fact-painting-of-targets-where-arrows-happened-to-hit/comment-page-1/#comment-412409
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ah, so ID is "a theory of inference to design", not the design inference, or the design hypothesis, or the design theory, or the theory of design, and since gordo-the-bloviator claims that it has been pointed out several times it must be true, even though he's the only one who has described it that way. What the fuck is a theory of inference? Is it the same as 'god-did-it'?
And of course he claims: "design being a fact of observation) as causal source on validated empirical signs" even though it's no such thing. It's all in his (and the other IDiots') feeble, delusional minds.
Isn't it interesting that gordo never even tries to get his bloviating word salad published in a legitimate scientific journal?
