Posted: Nov 08, 2019 6:12 pm
Rumraket wrote:Though it has to be said that much of the Intelligent Design output is just re-labeled classic creationism.
Very true, but I think the IDers are much worse than the run-of-the-mill creationists.
The Hams and Hovinds of this world are mostly just funny, in an eye-rolling way - barely more credible than flat earthers - but the IDers (Behe, Meyer, Dembski, Lennox et al) are much worse, as they're able to drape a lot of sciency-sounding words around their output, which fool many a genuine but uneducated lay person.
They are also often much, much better debaters than actual scientists, as they've honed their patter to perfection, and they cunningly misrepresent complex topics, supporting their position by creating the illusion of simplicity, again attractive to lay people.
I think they're much more dangerous, in reality.
That said, some ID stuff I came across recently prompted me to read this book by Donald Prothero. I'm about half way through it and it's fascinating.
Among other things, I've learned a little about cladistics so far, and discovered that the Cambrian Explosion, wasn't. It's a book that will need reading a second time.