RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:Probably the most consistent and 'solid' criticism they've come up with has been irreducible complexity. While I think they've failed (and if you do manage to make it through that Ken Miller presentation - you'll see why in there...), I think it would be fair to say that the 'problem' proposed by Behe - and the ID camp - has stretched science in answering the question. It certainly made me think a little harder about some of the details...
...although saying that, 'Irreducible complexity' is not really much more than a re-packaging of one of Darwin's own proposed falsifications back in 'Origin Of a Species' - so not all 'that' impressive. But still - credit where credit is due :)
I agree that Behe is probably the most sophisticated ID proponent to date, though I suspect that his critique will become less relevant as the science advances. At the very least, his book has value in pointing out areas where evolutionary scientists need to do further research.
Although I'm a little skeptical of Ben Stein's upcoming film, I do agree with the premise that nobody should lose their job for supporting a controversial theory-- at least, so long as it's remotely tenable. I'm looking forward to watching it.
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco - To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
If a scientist loses his job over Creationist or ID work, it's probably because they're doing a very bad job of their job, since Creationism and ID aren't very good science at all.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Sethbag wrote:If a scientist loses his job over Creationist or ID work, it's probably because they're doing a very bad job of their job, since Creationism and ID aren't very good science at all.
Yeah. Next we are going to see people complaining that they are getting excluded from academic astronomy because they think that the geocentric model of the universe is true after all.
And why would anyone think that? Could it be......er, um.... The Bible?
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie
yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
If a scientist loses his job over Creationist or ID work, it's probably because they're doing a very bad job of their job, since Creationism and ID aren't very good science at all.
Neither is the UN's or Al Gore's version of global warming.
If a scientist loses his job over Creationist or ID work, it's probably because they're doing a very bad job of their job, since Creationism and ID aren't very good science at all.
Neither is the UN's or Al Gore's version of global warming.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but there was quite a bit of controversy over the involvement of PZ Myers and Dawkins in this film. Apparently they were tricked into participating, under the guise that the film was about something else, and PZ Myers was kicked out of the premier. Dawkins wrote a rather interesting, but lengthy diatribe regarding it here: http://richarddawkins.net/article,2394, ... rd-Dawkins
Thanks, GoodK, for the link. I've read a few other horror stories online about the making of the film.
I was thinking about Coggins today (yes, I know -- startling) and how he approaches evolution and his mantra on the left. It appears to me that those that are rabid anti-evolutionists may not even take the time to familiarize themselves with the theory of evolution to begin with. This no doubt happens often, from just what I witness, since so often they seem to mistake the theory and don't seem to understand it. Most (if not all) of their information appears to come straight from those that are decrying evolution and it's really becoming quite political in a sense. More of the culture war, in fact. It's saddening to see battle lines being drawn and I don't see this film helping to decrease this, at all.
I wonder if those such as Coggins that are so vehemently anti-evolution have taken the time to really familiarize themselves with the theory? Do they read books rather then running to creationist sites and other sites that attack the theory (often times with just simple myths and common misconceptions) or have they done their homework? I am increasingly becoming convinced that homework is not being done -- that there is not a sincere attempt to even understand the theory. This is disheartening.
RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:Although I'm a little skeptical of Ben Stein's upcoming film, I do agree with the premise that nobody should lose their job for supporting a controversial theory-- at least, so long as it's remotely tenable. I'm looking forward to watching it.
