sparc
Posts: 2088
Joined: April 2007
|
Lewontin!
Surprisingly, it is not KairosFocus aka Gordon E. Mullings. Obviously, it doesn't matter what kind of fundamentalism one follows. In the link given above Yoram Bogacz is parroting Jonathan Wells. However, he is honest about his religious motivation: | Quote | | Some of the questions that motivated me to write Genesis and Genes (Feldheim, 2013) are reflected well through this type of historical episode. How often does a paradigm shift of this sort happen in science? How common is it for scientists to make absolute statements about physical phenomena that are not yet fully understood? How robust is the claim that some argument is supported by the consensus of scientists? And then there’s the Jewish angle. The Talmud teaches that everything that God created has a purpose.[7] Maharal (ca. 1520-1609), one of the greatest Jewish philosophers of the past half-millennium, wrote that even if we do not understand every feature of the human body, yet we are quite certain that nothing in it is superfluous.[8] Was that viewpoint ever compatible with the notion that our genomes are littered with junk? Most importantly, when evolutionary biologists proclaim, as they do often, that there is overwhelming evidence for evolution, is that evidence ever as hollow as the argument from junk DNA turned out to be? |
I am sure that one can find every single stupid claim ever made at UD on his webpages. Unsurprisingly, he chose left-handed DNA for te cover of his book.
--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."
- William Dembski -
|
