RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (356) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4, Fostering a Greater Understanding of IDC< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
MichaelJ



Posts: 462
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2012,22:30   

Quote (eigenstate @ Feb. 19 2012,12:38)
Pathetic is WAY too charitable to describe GilDodgen's "doubts" of his doubts of evolutionary theory:
 
Quote
The history of evolutionary theory has included quite a number of skeptics (the Wistar dudes were no dummies, and even Gould had reservations, until he was forced to recant), including Charles Darwin himself, who observed that the fossil record did not comport with his assumption that nature makes no jumps, but speculated that future investigation would reveal that the fossil record really was infested with the transitional intermediates his theory required.

Finally, I propose what I call the trajectory of the evidence. When a scientific theory is correct, the more we learn, the more the theory should have explanatory power, but the opposite has occurred concerning orthodox evolutionary theory. The more we learn about the incredible engineering sophistication found in even the simplest living cell, the more I’m inclined to be skeptical that the probabilistic resources could have been available to accomplish such a task through the proposed evolutionary mechanisms.

I thus defend the rationality of my skepticism.

He's been invited over and over to maybe just scratch the surface regarding his doubts about "probabilistic resources". No dice. Just a bunch of handwaving hoping everyone is too stupid to notice he won't even try a little bit to defend his doubts.

Doesn't rise to 'pathetic', even. This is how a fraud gives the audience and his critics the middle finger, by typing up hundreds of words that purposely avoid and evade what he claims to defend. Maybe you could just start with some of the probabilities you're concerned about, asks olegt, politely.

Fuck you, olegt, says Gil, and thanks for letting me defend my doubts by tell you all to fuck off.

Gil's argument is always only ever personal incredularity. I admit that I was taken in by his "Look at how smart I am" posts and was surprised by the pathetic responses that could have come from Hovind.

  
  10669 replies since Aug. 31 2011,21:06 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (356) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]