Commentary on Eugenie Scott and Glenn branch's "guest viewpoint: 'Intelligent design' not accepted by most scientists," 7/2/02 [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||The National School Boards Association enlisted Eugenie Scott and Glenn Branch to criticize intelligent design bullet point fashion. Here I want to respond to these bullet-point assertions. I would repeat the entire article, but copyright restrictions prevent me. The article is available at http://nsba.org/sbn/02-jul/070202-8.htm.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Aaron Sloman, Why Scientists and Philosophers of Science Should Teach Intelligent Design (ID) Alongside the Theory of Evolution.
Sahotra Sarkar (2011). The Science Question in Intelligent Design. Synthese 178 (2):291 - 305.
Glenn Branch (2002). In Defense of Methodological Naturalism. Philo 5 (2):249-255.
Chunyu Dong (2010). Intelligent Design From the Viewpoint of Complex Systems Theory. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 5 (3):461-470.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #95,578 of 739,402 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,269 of 739,402 )
How can I increase my downloads?