Quote
Quote
Science can test the materials and their properties. The results are expected to be repeatable, etc. The same results, however can be applied equally to either model. So how could one discriminate and call one set of tests "scientific" and the other "religious".?
When you add things to the question/hypothesis, you must test those things.

So when one adds "this all happened by random natural forces without any intelligent agent involved" to the hypothesis, one needs to add it to the experiment as well.

Quote
You are assuming that God is written out of the equation altogether by the way the hypothesis is worded. The exact sequence of events written in Genesis may be excluded, but God is not, He is just not tested for. The hypothesis "Iron sulfides....blah, blah, blah" only describes what may have happened. Since scientists have not been able to design an experiment to provide evidence that differentiate God's hand from naturally occurring factors, they cannot say in the experiment's conclusion that God, Ra, Juno, Shiva or Allah manipulated the iron and sulfur together to form the first primitive energy pathways. It would not be a conclusion drawn from the evidence, therefore not scientific.

My point is that all of these experiments would be perfectly valid if they were conducted for ID research. All the hypotheses apply equally well. Because they are interpreted in an atheist framework, they are perceived as only supporting atheist abiogenesis. The truth is, they support ID just as much, and ID has equal claim to the results. So when people ask if ID is science, well, it's got the same body of work backing it up as atheist abiogenesis.

All that's really being tested is how chemicals behave under certain conditions, nothing more.

There is no testable atheistic abiogenesis hypothesis. They have no viable science which applies exclusively to their belief.

Now when atheist abiogenesis devises an experiment or hypothesis which distinguishes it from ID, they might be able to claim to have a monopoly. Otherwise, they should be honest and admit that ID is their equal.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson