Top scientist gives up on creationists

The Guardian (UK) ^ | 30 May 2006 | James Randerson

[VadeRetro]

He wrote a book on the subject. So, you know he's wrong but you don't have a clue what he said?

[jveritas]

What fossiles are you talking about? I am asking a question, according to Darwin theory where did man come from?

[jude24]

I think the problem largely lies with scientifically-illiterate, but well-meaning Creationists attempting to rebut Darwinism using talking points given to them by hucksters.

If you're not scientifically trained, and you want to rebut the claims of Darwinism, where will you look? On Google, or article abstracts on SciFinder? Most laypersons are unfamiliar with the concepts of peer-reviewed science, so Dr. Dino is a good enough source of information. The claim that the Second Law of Thermodynamics means complexity cannot arise from randomness has the ring of truth to someone who didn't have to take Thermodynamics in college.

Both Creationists and Evolutionists would do well to learn from St. Augustine's advice - never judge a philosophy by its abuse. Kent Hovind (spit!) is a poor represtentive of all the real scientists out there who are quietly working on their research in their fields who just happen to believe God created the universe, perhaps in six literal days.

[Junior]

Don't change the subject. Do you have peer-reviewed research to support your contentions or not? Considering your current tact, I'd say "not." You're just talking out of your tail-end aren't you?

[VadeRetro]

So, you know it's one of the weakest theories in all of science but you don't know what it says?

[jveritas]

Where did man come from according to his theory, just let me know since you seem an expert in Darwin theory of evolution.

[ml1954]

It is one of the weakest theories ever forced on humanity under the guise of science.

What are the weaker 'scientific' theories to which you refer?

[VadeRetro]

Why don't you know? How is your ignorance strength?

You know it's the weakest theory out there. Why don't you know what it is? Why don't you know what you're even talking about?

[Dimensio]

Where did man come from according to his theory,

Humans descended from an ancestral hominid life form.

[Stultis]

Darwin's theory is correct

It is one of the weakest theories ever forced on humanity under the guise of science.

Well, in any case it is clearly the single most UNPOPULAR theory in the entire history of modern science. And it was, originally, extremely, even especially, unpopular among scientists.

And yet it prevailed in the highly demanding and sharply contested marketplace of scientific ideas. How do you explain that? It being so "weak" and all? Plus facing an initial strong scientific bias against it?

There has to be some explanation, doesn't there?

Frankly it would HAVE to be a conspiracy. (muhwahahahahaha!)

[jveritas]

I asked a question and you do not want to answer because this is where Darwin theory FALLS ALL APART.

PS: I have a Bachelor of Science in Physics and Master of Science in Mechanical engineering so Science and Math is my forte that is why I consider Darwin and his theory as a a very bad joke forced on people to accept it.

[Dimensio]

Creationists, too, know that there are gaps in their theory

If creationism is a theory, then what does it explain, what evidence exists to establish confidence in the explanation as a theory, what predictions are made by the theory, how can these theories be tested and what hypothetical observation would falsify creation theory and why?

[Gumlegs]

Random choice?

Your abortion might be any baby anywhere.

[PatrickHenry]

Help for new visitors to the evolution debate
Another service of Darwin Central, the conspiracy that cares.

If you're interested in learning about evolution, visit The List-O-Links.
If you'd like to understand the concept of speciation, visit Micro-evolution, Macro-evolution, and Speciation.
If you're serious about debating this issue, see How to argue against a scientific theory.
If you're permanently stuck on stupid, but determined to post anyway, use the Evolution Troll's Toolkit.

[VadeRetro]

You probably think I'm talking about the Origin of Species. I'm talking about a book called The Descent of Man.

Here's the online searchable version.

[jveritas]

And yet it prevailed in the highly demanding and sharply contested marketplace of scientific ideas. How do you explain that? It being so "weak" and all? Plus facing an initial strong scientific bias against it?

Many scientists do not want to consider God as source for creation hence they want to accept this one as they do accept the other unproven and weak theory of the Big Ben.

[VadeRetro]

PS: I have a Bachelor of Science in Physics and Master of Science in Mechanical engineering so Science and Math is my forte that is why I consider Darwin and his theory as a a very bad joke forced on people to accept it.

So why don't you know Jaques Shiite about what you're talking about?

[Dimensio]

I asked a question and you do not want to answer because this is where Darwin theory FALLS ALL APART.

How does the theory "fall apart" based upon your question?

PS: I have a Bachelor of Science in Physics and Master of Science in Mechanical engineering so Science and Math is my forte that is why I consider Darwin and his theory as a a very bad joke forced on people to accept it.

I fail to see how your educational background gives you credibility when speaking on the subject of biology.

[Juan Medén]

Geez.

Like Jones I am tired of arguing with fools who who refuse to take into account the existence of a creator God.

Go Google it.

[jveritas]

And why we do not have these ancestors anymore. Why do we still have the ape who is according to Darwin one of the ancestors but we do not have anymore the creature in between man and ape. The MISSING LINK, and hence the THEORY FALLS APART.