Joined: Aug. 2007
|Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 18 2008,19:29)|
|Does Simon always come across as an overwhelmingly nauseating, pompous ass??|
Gads, that whole discussion was nothing but rhetoric.
What never ceases to amaze me is that molecule to man is no more falsifiable than ID. *Evolution* is fact, but the idea that everything in nature arose from a primitive blob is merely an historical inference with virtually NO empirical evidence supporting the idea. Neither theory is any more beneficial to science than the other.
Guys like Simon and Dawkins are such a turn off. Their mannerisms are deplorable, and their talking points are empty.
Well, except that there seems to be a boundary beyond which the distinction between life and molecules gets more and more vague (viruses? prions?), and that the further back in time you go, the closer life gets to primitive forms like this. Since it's clear that we were not among those forms, is it really that much of a leap to speculate that life may have arisen from the molecules which make it up?
Meanwhile, ID asks us if it's such a leap to suggest that if humans can make neat stuff, and biology is neat, maybe someone made life. Which is nice, except they then spent twenty years giving talks about this idea, making fancy computer graphics about it, and sending DVDs to schools about it, while real scientists were working on abiogenesis hypotheses.
Miller and Urey actually put some gases in a glass globe. People have actually modeled bilipid layers to see if the RNA world hypothesis is feasible. ID people, in the meantime, have stalled. Nowhere can you find people running simulations which measure CSI, or a mathematical treatment of irreducible complexity. This isn't because of oppression. No one can stop Dr Dr Dembski from putting a Java applet up on UD (maybe under the Panda-monium game?) showing off his Explanatory Filter.
Of course, if ID was just a sham as evidenced by the Wedge Document and all the creationists that are free to quote ID to support their crap, then it'd make a lot more sense.