Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Paradigm Shifters growing legs?


The Paradigm Shifters: Overthrowing 'the Hegemony of the Culture of Darwin' From PR Newswire:

Major scientists from a dozen countries present evidence that a paradigm shift is underway or has already taken place, replacing neo-Darwinism (the standard model of evolution based on natural selection following the accumulation of random genetic mutations) with a vastly richer evolutionary synthesis than previously thought possible.

The Royal Society seems to cautiously agree: “Royal Society meet on paradigm shift in evolution? Many of the 50 or so scientists associated with The Third Way of Evolution will attend.”

Here is a developing discussion of possible interest at O’Leary for News’s Facebook page:

Gem from Joel Fletcher:

Joel Fletcher the “silent” revolution is taking place while TMZ monitors hollywood’s opinions on Darwinism.

Well, we all have our priorities, right? By the way, how’s it working out between Bimbette and the new Natural Selection shampoo?

Also from Fletcher:

Cannot wait to hear more about this Denyse, truly exciting times. I quickly read Mazur’s interview with Stuart Newman, May 15′ and am astounded how open he is, though he is sticking to Emergism(Poofiness). It’s refreshing interview.

I (O’Leary for News) wrote,

It is a most welcome development. From my perspective, there are three problems with Darwinism. 1) It’s an incorrect description of much evolutionary change. 2) It isn’t possible because randomness cannot generate that level of information. 3) It is a theory of everything whose defenders actively persecute doubters in science, however evidenced and reasonable their objections. I am quite happy to see co-belligerents taking the lead in dealing with 1 and 3 because 2 takes us into less charted territory. Territory that it is nice to have time for, apart from all the
brushfires created by the problems at 1 and 2. – d.

Getcher tickets.

See also: Talk to the fossils: Let’s see what they say back

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Another problem with Darwinism is it's unfalsifiable. If similar structures are related, that's evidence of common ancestry. If they are not related, that's evidence of convergent evolution or horizontal gene transfer. Darwinism is also unfalsifiable because natural selection is assumed to be capable of the observed diversity - whatever we see around us or in the fossil record - natural selection did it! A scientific approach would require that you first show natural selection is capable of producing the observed diversity, and/or would require evidence that the observed diversity is really caused by natural selection. Natural selection really means "evolution under naturalism", and naturalism is assumed a priori therefore Darwinists see no need to prove natural selection actually produces the observed diversity of life. They assume what they are trying to prove. Diversity assumed to be caused by natural selection is given as proof of natural selection. Jim Smith

Leave a Reply