From the article:
And:
The standard methodology of creationists is to find some phenomenon in nature which Darwinism cannot readily explain. Darwin said: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." Creationists mine ignorance and uncertainty in order to abuse his challenge. "Bet you can't tell me how the elbow joint of the lesser spotted weasel frog evolved by slow gradual degrees?" If the scientist fails to give an immediate and comprehensive answer, a default conclusion is drawn: "Right, then, the alternative theory; 'intelligent design' wins by default."
This is only two snippets form the article, but I do hope you will all enjoy it as much as I did.
Many evolutionary transitions are elegantly documented by more or less continuous series of changing intermediate fossils. Some are not, and these are the famous "gaps." Michael Shermer has wittily pointed out that if a new fossil discovery neatly bisects a "gap," the creationist will declare that there are now two gaps! Note yet again the use of a default. If there are no fossils to document a postulated evolutionary transition, the assumption is that there was no evolutionary transition: God must have intervened.
Has anyone been able to visit Agnostic Mom lately? Every time I ty to visit, I get a page loading error... If anyone can get a hold of her to let her know, it would be appreciated... It could just be my computer...
No comments:
Post a Comment