[pgyanke]

Now let's see how many can recognize that this was Ann Coulter's point in the evolution discussion in Godless. She wasn't debunking the theory, she was debunking the devotion to the theory that doesn't allow scrutiny nor acknowledgement of the missing links. It isn't science when it is beyond question.

[Filo]

Now let's see how many can recognize that this was Ann Coulter's point in the evolution discussion in Godless. She wasn't debunking the theory, she was debunking the devotion to the theory that doesn't allow scrutiny nor acknowledgement of the missing links.

I read the book. She was debunking the theory. She was, as you say, debunking the devotion to it as well, but she did it from a level of ignorance that prevented her from seeing why people are devoted to it - because it is the truth.

It isn't science when it is beyond question.

Agreed, but ID/Creationism hasn't yet raised a single valid question so to claim that those who understand evolution can't be moved based on the inept attempts of IDers is silly.

[freedumb2003]

She wasn't debunking the theory, she was debunking the devotion to the theory that doesn't allow scrutiny nor acknowledgement of the missing links. It isn't science when it is beyond question.

All sciences, TToE included, are open to scientific scrutiny and attack. Within the Evolution community there are heated debates on the meaning and proper framework for evidence, some of which has been around quite some time.

If you know of a scientific attack, please provide a summary (and links). On all of these threads no one has yet to provide this. Will you be the first?