Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Simmons vs. Myers Debate Link

Dave S.
February 4, 2008
Intelligent Design
1
Categories
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

I’ve been informed that the peanut gallery (Panda’s Thumb) is accusing me of covering something up for deleting my very brief post about the Simmons/Myers debate. I made the posting a few hours before the debate and included a hotlink so people could listen to it live. I’d intended at the time of writing to remove it after the debate was over as the live link would no longer be working. UD author Doctor David A. Cook had a more in depth article that included the same live link. No coverup. Here’s the link to the archived debate. A link to the archive is also in DA Cook’s orginal post.

Simmons vs. Myers Debate

Comments
Peter, please don't prove me wrong. Simmons was slaid. There are all of about 6 key transitionals in the whale fossil series, and Simmons didn't know them? Like get real! About "Myer’s did not answer Simmom’s questions about processes in human birth" This is something that Simmons slipped into his conclusion. It was a poorly developed afterthought for which Meyers was not given reasonable opportunity of rebuttal. Don't be over-zealous to root for your team. When you loose a game 78 to 2, you got slaid!bFast
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
09:54 AM
9
09
54
AM
PST
I was disappointed when the thread was deleted because it looked like UD was getting rid of the comments about Simmons who was apparently embarrassing. What should be done with this and all arguments by people like Myers is to put up their arguments for us to dissect. I would be interested in all the fossils he listed and what inconsistencies may be there and if there are no inconsistencies then what actually do the fossils actually mean. No set of fossils actually support gradualism. What they can support is common descent which a lot of people equate to gradualism. In other words if you find evidence for part of Darwin's theory then you support his other parts. This is obviously a fallacy.jerry
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
09:05 AM
9
09
05
AM
PST
I won't say the IDer was soundly defeated. I would say both sides had deficiencies. Simmons is not a biologist, Myer's could easily quote an article Simmons was unaware of. Myer's did not answer Simmom's questions about processes in human birth that could not have evoluted by chance. Myer's talked about the similarity of humans to chimpanzies, but evolution says that we did not evolve from chimps so the argument was specious. There are no human precursors. Simmons could have caught that, but he is not a biologist. I would give a very slight edge to Simmons.Peter
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
09:04 AM
9
09
04
AM
PST
The cached page can be found here: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:3KU7-tQMogQJ:www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/dr-geoff-simmons-vs-pz-myers-debate-link-to-listen-to-it/+simmons+site:www.uncommondescent.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=usPatrick
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
08:46 AM
8
08
46
AM
PST
There definetely was an active dialog attached to the deleted thread. What the dialog clearly showed was that the participants on UD are honest enough to recognize when their guy was soundly defeated. That said, Simmons didn't present a great ID case, but I doubt if any IDer concluded that there was therefore no serious case to be made.bFast
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
08:30 AM
8
08
30
AM
PST
I think they might be complaining about the comments that were deleted in the page created by Cook. I believe the accusation was that these comments were deleted because some were negative of Simmon's performance in the debate. But I spent some time myself responding to one thing Meyers said and that was deleted as well. EDIT: On second thought, I believe I mixed the 2 pages up. I had forgotten which thread I had responded to myself. On a side note, shortly after the pages related to PZ Meyers went up we had a mini deluge of his followers attempting to post comments filled with insults and the like.Patrick
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
07:39 AM
7
07
39
AM
PST
Note the following warning that accompanies the Meyers pharyngula science blog link on the KKMS website: Warning: This website contains profanity and may be offensive to some listeners. I believe this says a lot about the nature and character of many virulent anti-ID folks. It also betrays desperation and a heavy emotional investment in a philosophical worldview.GilDodgen
February 4, 2008
February
02
Feb
4
04
2008
07:33 AM
7
07
33
AM
PST
1 2

Leave a Reply