Are evolutionists right to say that we should accept experiments which are conducted in highly controlled environment (inside the lab) and then make assumption that this is precisely what happens in nature even when its unassisted?
Recent Comments
Ken Miller’s missed assumption on Evolution
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Atheism, Bible, Christ, Christianity, Church, Church History, Discernment, Evangelism, Evolution, God, Jesus, News, Prayer, Prophecy, Religion, Theology. Bookmark the permalink.
Defend The Word 
I think Miller is making the point that something could occur through natural means given the right conditions in a way that could be described using current science.
In other words, you don’t have to rely on an intelligent designer to explain something you don’t understand.
And just an FYI, but many Intelligent Design advocates, such as Behe, have no issue with common decent with modification, or evolution as you understand it.
Your title here is misleading as it implies ID is an affront against evolution, when its only against certain naturalistic aspects of the theory, or understanding, of the mechanisms that drive evolution. Miller himself is Roman Catholic and a theistic evolutionist in the broad sense of the term.