Replies

The main idea he seems to be saying is that since most Americans don't believe in evolution, it must not be true. So, basically the laws of nature are up for a popular vote like American idol contestants.

Nope, I don't think Wells is saying because a majority believes in something, it is true. I have heard Wells in church debates clearly rejecting the notion of "majority rules" in science. In fact, he cites Galileo and Copernicus as men who were IN THE MINORITY during their time who were eventually proven right.

His point is this --- If Darwinists of Dawkin's influence continue to stifle open exchange of ideas and use their influence to either bad-mouth, suppress, and use the power of government to prevent countering ideas ( like ID for instance ) from being heard, it will not do Darwinism any good in the eyes of the public. The tendency would be for the public to ask --- WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO HIDE ?

Well's second point is this --- We cannot compare the 21st century with Galileo's time where few people could even read or write then. Today, we have the internet. People are MORE EDUCATED than they were before ( and by that, I include people worldwide, not only Americans). We have the internet, newpapers and all sorts of media ... to call those who express doubt in Darwinism IGNORAMUSES ( see the many posts in this thread for instance ), is UNCONVINCING to say the least.

If Darwinists want to convince people after over 150 years of presenting their ideas, they have to show good evidence for what they present as true.

I have heard it being argued that “The burden of proof is indeed on the Darwinist to prove Darwinism. However it is also the burden of proof of the IDist to prove design. ”

But is it? Design has always been self evident which is what Darwin and his followers have tried to counter. We could just let them come up with some evidence first, but after a century and a half unconvincing evidence, it has fallen to ID to show us quite precisely how to detect design.