Learning and poor logic

The arguments over intelligent design surprise me. Don’t the critics realize that the anti-science crowd is learning?

For most of the 20^th Century we had to listen to Creationists insist that a biblical myth was scientific. The Creationists had PhD scientists claiming that Darwinian evolution was a badly flawed theory. Their best proof was that there were no fossils connecting whales to their land living mammalian ancestors.

Steven Jay Gould demolished the Creationists' example when all the missing links in the cetacean fossil family were found in the mid 1980s in the Indus Valley.

Now creationism has evolved to intelligent design.  This is a ...

This is a big step forward in learning for the former creationists. It will take a while for intelligent design people to learn that intelligent design is not a scientific theory for one reason: a scientific theory requires that the theory be falsifiable. A scientific theory has to pose an empirical test or a series of tests that could invalidate it.  Intelligent design can not meet this scientific criterion.

We can expect intelligent design people to learn slowly since most scientists don’t, themselves, understand that science is about empirical falsifiability. The global warming people changed the name of their theology to global climate change, but it still isn’t a falsifiable theory.

--------------------------

Poor logic on the Left. Lefties have bumper stickers that say “Bush Lied” -- referring to the absence of WMDs in Iraq.

Can’t Lefties figure out that a liar would make sure WMDs were found in Iraq?

A single close associate of the president could have easily carried out a project in total secrecy to deliver a laboratory on a truck to Iraq with WMDs inside it. Logic proves that President Bush did not lie on this issue.  A liar would have made sure WMDs were found.

Such poor logic by the left never surprises me. Worse, the Left never learns, they just move on to their next case of poor logic.