[continued from previous message]   
      
   >personally don't really care if ID is taught in the schools, though it    
   >would seem obvious the theory of evolution and it's shortcomings should    
   >be part of the course.  In the end, you find people, like some of those    
   >here, who just like to muck up any topic with this constant reference to    
   >this one case and claim a total victory of some kind.  I think it should    
   >be pretty much tuned out or you get nowhere.   
      
      
   Before you two can reasonably claim that supernatural causes are valid   
   alternatives to naturalistic ones, you need to identify:   
      
   1. what you mean by supernatural, with examples, and   
   2. how presuming supernatural causes explain anything.   
      
   I stipulate for arguments' sake the possibility of a supernatural   
   Creator.  Now then, tell me how that helps you say whether X is more   
   or less likely than Y.  With naturalistic causes, there are physical   
   limits which are identifiable and can be experimentally demonstrated.   
   Not so with supernatural causes.   
      
   --    
   To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)