Why Intelligent Design is NOT a Wholly Negative Argument

-
EvoTARD quote-miners think their quote-mining ignoramce is some sort of refutation of Intelligent Design. They also think their ignorance of science is a refutation of Intelligent Design.

Ya see the design inference consists of TWO components- ALL design inferences do, including archaeology and forensic science. Those two components are 1) eliminating necessity and chance AND 2) A match of some prespecified criteria, ie the positive aspect.

IOW we follow Newton's Four Rules of Scientific Reasoning (occam's razor, parsimony, explanatory filter):

1. admit no more causes of natural things than are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances,

2. to the same natural effect, assign the same causes,

3. qualities of bodies, which are found to belong to all bodies within experiments, are to be esteemed universal, and

4. propositions collected from observation of phenomena should be viewed as accurate or very nearly true until contradicted by other phenomena.

So what is the quote-mine? EvoTARDS only see the first component of the design inference, are too stupid or ignorant to understand the second component and prattle on as if the second component doesn't exist. And the sad part the way I said it is exactly how scientists do it. But then again if you ar an evoTARD you ain't no scientist and you sure as hell don't understand science.

So as anyone with an IQ over 70 can see and understand, ID is NOT a wholly negative argument. Just because elimination of other causes is a requirement of any and all design inferences does not make it a wholly negative argument. Only a drooling moron would think so- so enter RichTARD Hughes...