On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Shock, Bob wrote:
> This seems to lead to the question: Who designed the designers?

It may lead to that question, but to my knowledge there is no
scientific way to answer it.  I don't think it should be held
against ID theory that it can't answer every question you can
think up.  What theory can?

> The claim that the designers were not supernatural seems to be
> a cover for creationists.

I didn't make such a claim.  To say that the designers were or
were not supernatural goes beyond what can be inferred from the
observable evidence.  ID is the claim that, given what we know
now, it is reasonable to infer design.  That's all.  Period.

Some creationists are happy with ID; some are not.  Some
creationists are delighted with Big Bang cosmology too, finding
in it evidence of a creative act of God.  But Big Bang cosmology
itself has nothing to say about this, for or against it.

The fact that ID or Big Bang cosmology is *consistent* with some
theological views doesn't make either one a "cover" for those
views.  After all, why do creationists need a cover?

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]