tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post1434081072142068233..comments2024-03-28T12:34:14.649-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: You don't understand intelligent design!Victor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-41014535186971564432010-02-19T08:51:45.106-07:002010-02-19T08:51:45.106-07:00It seems Barr has a much better handle on the issu...It seems Barr has a much better handle on the issues than Richards. Barr's analysis of Dembski is excellent, for instance, Richards does nothing to defuse it.<br /><br />My impression is that many advocates of ID don't understand ID. I don't even know the number of times someone recommended I read Dembski's book that would then clam up and turn red when I would try to talk to them about it, about the details of the explanatory filter (I read the book very closely). Somehow many ID-christians absorbed, without actually reading or understanding the book, that Dembski had somehow settled things or provided a tour de force that would make actual scientists take it seriously once and for all.<br /><br />I'm not saying Richards is one of them, but reading his article it sure seems that way. Barr's summary/criticism of the explanatory filter is quite lucid, I'm jealous of his writing skills.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.com