[doc30]

I just lost more than a degree of respect for Orson Scott Card. Then again, there are few science fiction authors that actually do a good job of capturing science in their writings. They have incredible imagination and creativity, and write some interesting stories, but it is fiction that they write. I guess this is another example.

[b_sharp]

I have to agree. I've enjoyed a number of OSC's books, especially the 'Speaker for the Dead' series and was under the impression he was as much science as religion. I guess I was wrong.

Very sad.

Very telling that one of his complaints is the use of Ad Hom by the Darwinists which he listed smack dab in the middle of his own rather lengthy Ad Hom.

[munchtipq]

Really? You read the article differently than I did, then. What I took away was:

- The complexity arguments put forth were interesting and need to be explained.
- ID isn't a scientific answer of any kind, and is in fact a religious concept.
- ID shouldn't be taught in science classes.

I kind of agree with most of that.

[Tolik]

OSC clearly does not want to mix his belief in God and his love of science. While lots of stuff in this article is debatable, the overall tone is in favor of evolution and against calling ID science. Some my detest that, but he also put succinctly how NOT to debate in favor of evolution.

Anyway, totally unrelated to the subject of this thread, but you mentioned that you love Sci-Fi and I am always a sucker for good recommendations. Any names and "must reads"?

My personal favorites of late alongside OSC are Vernor Vinge (everything), Dan Simmons (Hyperion Cantos), Neal Stephenson (Diamond Age and Snow Crush, did not read his "historical" 1000+ pages books)