Patrick May, Ignorant of Science and Intelligent Design
Patrick May is proud to be an ignorant tool. His continued spewage is:
Neither Upright BiPed nor any other ID proponent have ever answered some very simple yet essential questions:
■What did the designer do?
■When did the designer do it?
■How did the designer do it?
■Where did the designer do it?
■Who or what is the designer?
Unless and until these questions are answered, ID isn’t an explanation of anything and is certainly not a scientific alternative to the theory of evolution.Define evolution and provide testable hypotheses
What did evolution do?
When did evolution do it?
How did evolution do it?
Where did evolution do it?
But I digress. Patrick's questions are neither simple, essential nor even relevant. As I have been telling these scientifically illiterate evoTARDS over and over again:
Reality dictates that in the absence of direct observation or designer input, the ONLY possible way to make any SCIENTIFIC determination about the designer(s) or the specific process(es) used, is by studying the design and all relevant evidence.
THAT is exactly how it is done with archaeology and exactly how it is done with forensic science. And BTW, Intelligent Design is about the detection and study of design in nature.
So Patrick doesn't know anything about science and he doesn't know anything about Intelligent Design. But he does know how to be a belligerent asshole.