A rave!

The thing that makes Intelligent Design pseudo-science is the lack of peer review. When they allow peer review most scientists reject their claims out of hand. In particular they want the supernatural intervention to be accepted by science. Supernatural intervention is the opposite of science. Intelligent design cannot be tested, it cannot predict anything and it doesn't try to prove anything. It just is and doesn't want to answer questions.

So, lets draw an parallel. Say the ID proponents get this concept on its feet. In this world all science has to accept that supernatural intervention is equally valid as established scientific theory. Now, we sent our friendly local fundamental christian to the doctor because he is bleeding out of his arse.

Does the fundy ask the doctor to pray in tongue for god to reveal the illness to the doctor or does the fundy want some scientifically valid tests done? Does he want to be admitted to hospital or sent to a church to be prayed for? Say we have a diagnosis of acute bowel cancer. Would the fundy want a six month course of intensive prayer or an operation and chemo.

What am I trying to say here? Do I have a point? Can I get to my point?

My point is that your bog-standard fundy talks the talk about supernatural intervention being equally as valid as scientific theory but they would not accept the doctor's prescription of 'medical prayer' that would be scientifically proven under ID.

Say the fundy died while being treated by prescribed prayer. Do you suppose that their family would seek compensation from the doctor's malpractice?

Why are they at the doctor's surgery at all? Isn't cancer a shortcut to heaven! When you're life is on the line you are talking the talk but definately not walking the walk.

Now I don't want fundies to all go and die. I just want seperation of faith and science. The last time faith had precident over scientific endeavour it was called a dark age. I don't want another dark age. The last one cost us 600 years of developement.