The chutzpah Darwinists sometimes bring to the table is often breathtaking. This tactic is based on the old saw about the wife who catches her husband in flagrante delicto with another woman and the following exchange ensues: Wife: “How could you?” Husband: “How could I what?” Wife: “Be in bed with another woman of course!” Husband: “I’m not in bed with another woman.” Wife: “I see her right there.” Husband: “No you don’t.” Wife: “Yes I do” Husband: “Who are you going to believe, me our your lying eyes?” It is not unusual for an exchange with a Darwinist to go like this: Darwinist unambiguously advances proposition X. IDer quotes the Darwinist and demonstrates that proposition X is an error. Read More ›

Sometimes an example of Darwinist Derangement Syndrome (see UD’s glossary) is just too delicious to allow it to languish deep in a comment thread.  Here’s an exchange between Adapa and WJM in the Way Forward thread: First, Adapa claims that science has “conclusively demonstrated” that unguided evolution can produce observed diversity of life: Adapa @99: . . . science has already conclusively demonstrated that the observed natural process of random genetic variations filtered by selection and retaining heritable traits is sufficient to produce the biological life variations we see today . . . @ 587 William J Murray disagrees and says unless a P(T|H) calculation can be made for a naturally occurring biological phenomenon “evolution cannot be vetted as ‘unguided.’” Read More ›