INTELLIGENT DESIGN EVIDENCE
Where Evidence is King
Where Evidence is King
|
Here is the point to always keep in mind when considering evidence: “Evidence for”
something is not the same as “proof for” something.
We know this in everyday experience; evidence the suspect was at the scene of the
crime is not proof he did the crime. The suspect may or may not in fact be the criminal,
but simply being at the scene of the crime is not enough to convict him.
Evidence in nature, such as the fossil record, is indeed evidence for evolution in the
sense of evidence “in support of” evolution. With this understanding one can see that
the fossil record does support the notion of evolution to some degree; that is, it is
consistent with a theory that predicts historical extinct organisms. But to support a
proposition is far from proving the same, and this is where the confusion occurs. For
evidence to “prove” a theorized historical event “happened,” the evidence must not
only sufficiently account for the event with no (or, at least a minimum of) anomalies,
but it must also effectively rule out alternatives.
something is not the same as “proof for” something.
We know this in everyday experience; evidence the suspect was at the scene of the
crime is not proof he did the crime. The suspect may or may not in fact be the criminal,
but simply being at the scene of the crime is not enough to convict him.
Evidence in nature, such as the fossil record, is indeed evidence for evolution in the
sense of evidence “in support of” evolution. With this understanding one can see that
the fossil record does support the notion of evolution to some degree; that is, it is
consistent with a theory that predicts historical extinct organisms. But to support a
proposition is far from proving the same, and this is where the confusion occurs. For
evidence to “prove” a theorized historical event “happened,” the evidence must not
only sufficiently account for the event with no (or, at least a minimum of) anomalies,
but it must also effectively rule out alternatives.
Consider an unwitnessed crime scene having a dead body. Detectives on the scene
look for circumstantial, material evidence to piece together an explanation for a past,
historical, unrepeatable event. The evidentiary question is whether or not the death is
the result of intelligent causes (murder) or unintelligent causes (accident). The
evidence is what it is, and its the same for either -- the question is simply which cause
is more reasonable based on the evidence at hand. Some evidence will be
ambiguous, i.e, it could support both causes, but some evidence will weigh more
heavily for one cause over the other.
look for circumstantial, material evidence to piece together an explanation for a past,
historical, unrepeatable event. The evidentiary question is whether or not the death is
the result of intelligent causes (murder) or unintelligent causes (accident). The
evidence is what it is, and its the same for either -- the question is simply which cause
is more reasonable based on the evidence at hand. Some evidence will be
ambiguous, i.e, it could support both causes, but some evidence will weigh more
heavily for one cause over the other.
| Evolution or Intelligent Design It's all the same evidence--the difference is in the interpretation of the evidence. Almost all evidence has a more reasonable interpretation, and it is almost always more reasonable to infer intelligent design over unintelligent occurrence. |
 |