Posted: Mar 05, 2011 1:06 pm
CharlieM wrote:In case anyone who thinks they are countering what I wrote didn't read this the first time round, I'll repeat it:
"That's why I don't look for evidence against evolution. Why? Because I believe in evolution. But I see lots of evidence that casts doubt on the prevailing neo-Darwinian orthodoxy."
I never said that the quotes I gave were evidence against evolution. I just want people to look at the facts that are emerging and ask themselves, "In what way is the neo-Darwinian explanation having to be adjusted to accommodate the facts? If there are no doubts in your mind then what can I say? You're just as much a fundamentalist as we find amongst young earth creationists.
When I get the time I'll give a longer response to some of the points brought up, but there's a lot to go through.
Regards,
CharlieM
Alright fair enough, if the ID community's obsession with evolution is so extreme that they want to argue about the minor details of the modern synthesis, have at it horse. It strikes me a rather odd subject to see fit for highschool-level discussions. Why stop there? Why not argue about the thoughts on proper understandings on fluid dynamics? The formation of the magnetic field of the earth?
Now the problem is that, this is not really what the ID community actually wants. They are blowing matters of interpretations of empirical findings and discussions on population dynamics completely out of proportion. What they really want is to shoehorn mythology into classrooms, and trying to cast doubt on the modern synthesis is just the first step in that process. We know their desired goal and it has nothing to do with furthering a proper scientific understanding of evolutionary mechanisms.