Replies

"***Is there a list of creat authorities that the abiogs accept? Or are there simply none? If there are none, then how did we get this far such that a president thinks there IS some scientific basis for the position? I understand the concept of "vast majority", so that means we're really talking about a very small, vocal minority. It shouldn't be impossible to pin down the number.

I have no idea. Pretty much every scientist that I've read concerning ID is in it for the religion. The movement was given legs by Phillip Johnson who was very forthcoming with his reasons for restarting ID - he wanted to get rid of evolution. Since then, pretty much all of the ID backers have been religious. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, but most of us have experience with Creation Science proponents who twist things as basic as thermodynamics in order to prove Genesis correct. The same kind of twisting (and shouting) is used by the most vocal of the IDists.

If you find any IDists that aren't interested in just denouncing evolution but in actually proving ID, let us know.

I notice you keep referring to the evo side as abios. That isn't a fair label, there are a number of evos that believe abiogenesis had a helping hand.

"***Those types of guys must be the authorities that I am looking for. someone who won't blow the whole thing out of proportion (220 orders of magnitude difference between 2 camps!). Seldom does not mean never. Where are these guys?

First go to the Discovery Institutes's web site. There are some authors there that are just over the top, others that are more reasonable.

"***One idea which certainly had validity but found no acceptance in its own generation was tectonic plate theory. It took several decades for the old generation of scientists who didn't accept it to die off, and a new, more open minded generation replaced them.

That is quite true, although they were fighting against faith as well. It also happened with Quantum Physics. However in Quantum Physics, there was some initial acceptance but little understanding. It took new minds just to understand the concept. Even Einstein, who was a big part of QP, didn't accept parts of it.

"***Yikes, he's your president, too. "

Nope. I'm Canadian.

"*** I would presume for your statement to make sense that you mean these guys aren't scientific authorities. Is there any basis for that statement?

I have no concrete evidence because I do not know all the advisers. Rove is anti-evolution. Chaney is anti-evolution, Others I just don't know. I do know that his science adviser is against ID.

As Dr. Shermer in eSkeptic magazine notes:

In fact, Bush’s science adviser, John H. Marburger 3rd, said in a telephone interview with the New York Times that “evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology” and “intelligent design is not a scientific concept.” It's interesting that the prez ignored his Science adviser on a matter of science.

You are right, at least from my point of view, waiting would have been a good idea.