<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Theistic Evolution and Popperians: Messages on the Moon</title>
	<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/01/05/theistic-evolution-and-popperians-messages-on-the-moon/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:18:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Matt McIntosh</title>
		<link>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/01/05/theistic-evolution-and-popperians-messages-on-the-moon/#comment-4275</link>
		<author>Matt McIntosh</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2006 02:02:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2006/01/05/theistic-evolution-and-popperians-messages-on-the-moon/#comment-4275</guid>
		<description>I don't see why you think Message 2 would create problems for Popperians at all. I don't find anything unreasonable in continuing to regard ID as unscientific even given Message 2. It could well be true, but it still wouldn't be amenable to scientific methods.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t see why you think Message 2 would create problems for Popperians at all. I don&#8217;t find anything unreasonable in continuing to regard ID as unscientific even given Message 2. It could well be true, but it still wouldn&#8217;t be amenable to scientific methods.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
