Aphex_Twin
Evergreen
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2002
- Messages
- 7,474
They say "Never argue with an idiot - he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience." It seems to be the case with the current evo-creationism debates. Has Creationism sucked the life blood and critical "killer instinct" of Evolution scientists?
A very interesting article, apparently debunking Evolution, but from a non-Creationist skeptic. Link
I think he is indeed honest in not being a Creationist and this should be a good excercise for proponents of Evolution. It should also serve as a guide as to what not to attribute to Evolution. It should also point out that the "we don't know" is a valid answer, especially on weak claims (not that Evolution is a weak claim, but that certain things within the field are indeed weak).
Note that, especially towards the end there are a few fallacious statements, namely:
"that Evolution concerns itself with the beginning of life"
"that we have to observe a species changing into another to prove Evolution"
"that statements on how species A might have developed as it did are instrumental in the scientific validity of Evolution"
In short, as far as science is concerned today, Evolution is the best theory, it is plausible, it establishes a certain number of general principles, but in no way has it been theoretically funded to the depth and precision of sciences like Physics. So it appears it is somwehere in between "valid, undisputable science" and "unproven theory".
Have fun
A very interesting article, apparently debunking Evolution, but from a non-Creationist skeptic. Link
I think he is indeed honest in not being a Creationist and this should be a good excercise for proponents of Evolution. It should also serve as a guide as to what not to attribute to Evolution. It should also point out that the "we don't know" is a valid answer, especially on weak claims (not that Evolution is a weak claim, but that certain things within the field are indeed weak).
Note that, especially towards the end there are a few fallacious statements, namely:
"that Evolution concerns itself with the beginning of life"
"that we have to observe a species changing into another to prove Evolution"
"that statements on how species A might have developed as it did are instrumental in the scientific validity of Evolution"
In short, as far as science is concerned today, Evolution is the best theory, it is plausible, it establishes a certain number of general principles, but in no way has it been theoretically funded to the depth and precision of sciences like Physics. So it appears it is somwehere in between "valid, undisputable science" and "unproven theory".
Have fun
