Joe claims ID is not anti-evolution

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@JoeG

IC is an argument against blind and mindless processes such as natural selection and drift. ID is NOT anti-evolution.

You need to be able to test the claim that natural selection and drift can produce something like ATP synthase yet no one knows how to do such a thing.

@JoeG (& @Jonathan_Burke):

Okay, I’d like to review your list, Joe, and help clarify a few things:

A] “IC is an argument against blind and mindless processes such as natural selection and drift.”
Clarification: We can say similar things about BioLogos. Since God is part of the BioLogos model, it ALSO is not blind and mindlesas.

B] ID is NOT anti-evolution.
Clarification: I think you mean it is not necessarily anti-evolution.

C] You need to be able to test the claim that natural selection and drift can produce something like ATP synthase …
Clarification: If BioLogos shares your interest in God’s role, there is no entailed “need” to test that claim.

Claims about mutations and speciation vary - - and so for each variation, the claim that needs testing varies.