Ed and God

Whether about surfing or not GTF is not a 'straightforward' song, It clearly has more than one theme running through it. Your suggestion that 'first he was stripped, then he was stabbed' refers to 'falling on the reefs' seems a bit silly. I could see how reefs could stab you but how would they strip you? even worse how would they strip you first, then stab you? The lyric is clear on this point 'first he was stripped, then he was stabbed by faceless MEN!!' I would also like to know how your surfer gives away his 'love that is saved' and wants to share the 'key to the locks on the chains he saw everywhere'.

Your post about intelligent Design being 'not science' serves to illustrate Philip Johnson's argument. Your statement is based on the popular definition of science that hold that only naturalistic explanations of the world are scientific. If only naturalistic explanations count as science then Darwinism wins by default because it automatically rules out its only rival (creation by an intelligent designer). If this definition of science is true then Einstein, Newton, and pretty much all the great scientists of history are 'not scientists' as they believed that God is the cause of the universe. When naturalism became the dominant philosophy in science, people thought that the cell was little more than a glob of jelly. They had no idea of the staggering complexity that we now observe inside the cell, the DNA molecule, for example has been called 'the most efficient information bearing system in the universe'. It is time design was back on the table, and it is, but the Darwinian establishment is petrified so they just keep telling everyone that ID is 'not science' hoping that this will be enough to stop anyone considering the arguments. Anyone who has read any of the books published by ID scientists (such as prof Behe's Darwin's Black Box) will know that the arguments are scientific ones, not religious ones as is claimed. I know that ID lost in the Dover trial because the Judge claimed that ID is 'not science' but dont let science be defined by a judge. The biggest mistake we can make is to let something be defined by its critics, if you want to make an informed choice read an ID book and judge for yourself. Science should be a search for truth, wherein, when considering an unobservable event like the beggining of life or the universe, all possible explanations are considered. As the great philosopher Alvin Plantinger said after the Dover ruling:

‘If you exclude the supernatural from science, then if the world, or some phenomena within it are supernaturally caused – as most of the worlds people believe – you wont be able to reach that conclusion scientifically. Observing methodological naturalism thus hamstrings science by precluding science from reaching what would be an enormously important truth about the world. It might be that, just as a result of this constraint, even the best science in the long run will wind up with false conclusions.