Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Why anyone takes evolutionary biology seriously after this, I will never know …


I mean this: A complete inability to predict anything, using current assumptions.

I am not saying it’s not worthwhile. Mental health studies may be worthwhile too, even if you can’t predict when someone goes postal ….

It’s another thing for people to use laws to force this stuff on the school system.

Remember, the One Big Rule is: There is no design in nature.

Design in nature: Precisely what most people believe and most evolutionary biology tax burdens* deny.

*tax burden – a legacy from the days when being a professor meant that a guy knew something, so people helped pay his salary through their taxes. It is becoming less and less obvious that this is a good proposition.

Note: I believe and hope that the author of this article will soon post a few paragraphs here, and you really should read the whole thing to get the basic idea.

I don't know why anyone took evolution seriously before this. The One Big Rule, that there is NO DESIGN in nature, a metaphysical and not a scientific position, is utter nonsense. To deny the ontological status of design only to explain away the existence of "the overwhelming illusion of design" (Dawkins) by awarding ontological status to "apparent design" is idiocy of the highest order. If there is no design in nature, then THERE IS NO DESIGN in nature. We humans are part of nature so that means we don't design anything either. Oh really? This is so ridiculous that I can't even believe we still have to have this conversation. "Apparent design" indeed. Hah. tgpeeler

Leave a Reply