Replies

I'm just passing on a generalized complaint I've heard frequently over the years.

Alfred Weggener was laughed off the stage at his first presentation of his continental drift theory. Not a scientist of his age ever adopted the Weggenerian view.

Eventually, the new science of tectonics proved Weggener to be correct. All current scientists believe tectonics to be the correct answer.

At the same time all the unbelievers are now conveniently dead.

Alfred Weggener was laughed off the stage at his first presentation of his continental drift theory. Not a scientist of his age ever adopted the Weggenerian view.

1. Can you prove that doubled-absolute assertion?
2. Would you be willing to admit that a single counterexample invaldates such an absolute assertion?

I took geology before plate tectonics was accepted. I would like some references and citations for your claim that continental drift was laughed.

When I took geology it was taken quite seriously, even though there was no known mechanism capable of moving continents.

By "taken seriously" I mean the evidence for it (and there was quite a lot) was enthusiastically discussed at the introductory course level.

One of the things that made continental drift a serious hypothesis is that it predicted things which were, in fact found. It was accepted in half a century.

On the other hand, ID has been around in its present form for two hundred years without bringing any data to the table or making any predictions about what kind of data should be found. It has done no research and proposed no research. It has proposed nothing which would support or falsify its claims. It says nothing about the designing entity, nothing about the purposes, motives or methods of the alleged designing entity. All of these are elementary parts of any forensic investigation.

Last of all, and most sadly, ID advocates would not even have been looking for an intermediate fossil. There is no explanatory ID hypothesis that would expect an intermediate fossil.