Review of Godless -- (Centers on Evolution)

Powells Review a Day ^ | August 10, 2006 | Jerry Coyne

[freedumb2003]

Well, I'm offended by your categorization of Intelligent Design and Creation Science as "anti-Science" and "dark age beliefs". The debate here is not science verses non-science.

Creationism and ID are non-science. The debate is exactly that.

The debate is over the interpretation of scientific evidence and whether or not it really supports one theory over the other.

Please provide an alternate scientific theory to TToE. Neither Creationism nor ID fulfill the requirement.

Over 77% of republicans do not believe in evolution. That doesn't make us a party of dark age beliefs.

#1 - I don't buy that number. #2 - Science is not a popularity contest.

That makes us a party whose majority members question the validity of what masquerades as science in the field of life origins.

That makes us a party (if I buy your numbers) which is actively promoting the dumbing down of America. We are handing the lead in Life Sciences to non-muslim Europe and Asia.

[b_sharp]

"She shows how the fossils do not prove the Theory and scientists continually have to ammend their findings to make them fit. She destroyed Darwinism quite well."

"One of the Great Conservative Reads."

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

God that hurt...

[PatrickHenry]

If you don't laugh at some of these posts, you gotta cry.

[stands2reason]

But if you don't believe his writings were inspired, you could argue that he was learned and skilled enough to write so eloquently and historically. Or could you?

You don't think Moses was learned? I don't understand where you are going here.

Still, I do not contend that Moses "made it up wholesale".

[DannyTN]

"Please provide an alternate scientific theory to TToE. Neither Creationism nor ID fulfill the requirement."

They do fill the requirement, you just won't recognize it.

I don't buy that number (77% of republicans)

I posted the links to muliple polls here see posts 73, 75 and 90 in the following thread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1670849/posts?page=93

You are in denial about Republicans rejecting evolution, just like you are in denial about ID and Creation being valid alternative explanations to evolution.

[b_sharp]

You answered my post in just under a minute. How would you know it was there that quickly?

You're spooky.

[Gumlegs]

That's Mark Hanna you're thinking of. I voted for the full lunch pail.

[PatrickHenry]

At Darwin Central, we have access to these things before they appear in the thread.

[b_sharp]

Well it appears my work here is done.

All fetter sane.

[Gumlegs]

I'VE GOT TEARS IN MY EARS (FROM LYIN' ON MY BACK IN MY BED WHILE I CRY OVER YOU)
(Harold Barlow)

I've got tears in my ears from lyin' on my back
In my bed while I cry over you
And the tears in my ears, they're off the beaten track
Since you said "It's goodbye, we are through"
So if I should get water on the brain
You will know you're the one who is to blame
I've got tears in my ears from lyin' on my back
In my bed while I cry over you.

I've got tears in my ears from lyin'on my back
In my bed while I cry over you
I've been cryin' these tears and soakin' in my sack
Since the day I found you were untrue
And if I don't get up pretty soon
I'll turn into a sleepy lagoon
I've got tears in my ears from lyin' on my back
In my bed while I cry over you.

I've got tears in my ears from lyin' on my back
In my bed while I cry over you
It's been so many years, my sacroiliac
Feels as though it's been soaked through and through
Oh, you lied when you said we'd take the plunge
Now I know how it feels to be a sponge
I've got tears in my ears from lyin' on my back
In my bed while I cry over you.

[Dante Alighieri]

Ok. Let's do a little experiment.

Is ID or Creationism:

A) Falsifiable - are scientists going to be able to potentially show it to be false?

B) Tentative - is it subject to change and incomplete?

C) Naturalistic - does it use natural explanations to explain natural phenomena?

D) Parsimonious - does it make the least assumptions possible and does it not unnecessarily complicate itself?

E) Make Accurate Predictions - Does it predict what we should see in the fossil record, in comparative genomics, etc.

F) Encompassing - Does it explain why predictions made by evolutionary theory are very accurate and why evidence supports evolution?

G) Supported - Are there many positive lines of genuine evidence for it?

[spatso]

"That makes us a party whose majority members question the validity of what masquerades as science in the field of life origins"

As I noted earlier I do not know much about science, my degree is in theology. I do know that when someone attempts to assert a faith based belief under the umbrella of "Creation Design or Creation Science" that it is merely preposterous fluff.

[freedumb2003]

They do fill the requirement, you just won't recognize it.

In what possible way could "here a Designer steps in" be anything less than religion? It is not falsifiable, testable, observable nor any of the other umpteen requirements for a scientific theory (heck even a scientific hypothesis).

You are in denial about Republicans rejecting evolution, just like you are in denial about ID and Creation being valid alternative explanations to evolution.

If you are right, I am very afraid of the damage our party is doing to the next generation of Americans. You can repeat "denial" all you want but that doesn't fix the problems of Creationism and ID vis a vis real science.

But I understand your philosophical thinking. It just needs to stay in philosophy.

[freedumb2003]

Still, I do not contend that Moses "made it up wholesale".

He was Jewish -- he could do much better than just wholesale! ;)

[betty boop]

But Ms Coulter has done such for years. However, she's is a lawyer.

Doc, Ann's arguments are at least reasonable. By reasonable I mean: well supported by direct observation, logic, and evidence properly qualified and applied. Not to mention an acute sense of history.

Which is more than I can say for the jerk who compared her to a pink (or white) flamingo.... I mean, how subjective can you get???

Did you have a larger point you wanted to raise?

Ann may be a lawyer by education; but she sure doesn't act like one, existentially speaking.

Thanks for writing, Doc! I'm looking forward to your reply.

[bray]

Quite the opposite of your very biased opinion. We as Conservatives should not swallow anything w/o any proof. The fossils do not prove that evolution is plausible and you would rather believe the sun circles the earth as long as your scientist gods say it does.

As a Conservative I am not going to believe everything that is shoved down my throat. That is hardly a dark age belief. Where are all those Transitional Species???

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Shalom Israel

[bray]

So where are all the Transitional Fossils laughing boy?? You did read the book right, or are you just postering for your envirothugs?

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Shalom Israel

[spatso]

"The fossils do not prove that evolution is plausible and you would rather believe the sun circles the earth as long as your scientist gods say it does."

I do not know that much about science and I leave its understanding to those who are expert in the field. I do understand the teaching of salvation history within our religious traditions. And, I know that when I hear people talking about "intelligent design" as a science there is no biblical or extra biblical source for such nonsense.

[PatrickHenry]

You are being asked for transitional fossils. This won't impress the creatonists, but the lurkers may find it helpful. Even ONE transitional is sufficient to rebut the notion of special creation:

Post 661: Ichneumon's stunning post on transitionals.
Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ. Yes, transitional fossils exist.
Archaeopteryx. Reptile-to-bird transitional fossil.
Archaeopteryx: FAQS . A true transitional fossil
Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals.

[Coyoteman]

Posting dense, obtuse and voluminous torts is not an answer to any but judges with too much time on their hands.

Those were to assist some folks who were having trouble with technical definitions. I post the definitions periodically because there are always new people on the threads.

I have received far more frmails of thanks than I have posts such as yours complaining about the volume of the posts.