Fact mentioned by Michael Behe in a debate with Stephen Barr: that some biology textbooks say that the process of evolution is "undirected" (it's worth noting that Eugenia Scott, head of the National Center for Science Education, said that this adjective should be deleted from science textbooks, and that she justified this by saying that it's already implicit in the term "random") My thought about that is that natural science is not competent to use the words "directed" or "undirected." That is, natural science doesn't have the word "directed" as part of its vocabulary. Intelligent design, if it's a science at all, is a social science, not a natural science. This is most obviously true in the case of physics. Consider how physics is not competent to describe, index or demonstrate the existence of "direction" or "indirection" in the case of human agency: what sort of physics experiment--using...
Commentary and discussion regarding science, faith and culture by Leo White