RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (500) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 2, general discussion of Dembski's site< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 80
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 09 2009,22:36   

6:33 pm

Gil @68
I never said that “engineers are in a better position to judge biology than biologists.” I’ve claimed that when evolutionary biologists make claims about the creative power of their proposed mechanism of random variation and natural selection to produce systems that give every indication of being highly engineered technology, they should be required to produce at least some empirical evidence — not declarations of consensus within their incestuous group — that the proposed mechanism is actually capable of producing the technology we observe.

   In no other area of real, hard science would the extravagant, untested, and unverified claims of Darwinists be accepted without challenge.

Meanwhile, the National Academy of Engineering is Celebrating the Achievements of Charles Darwin

Gil, since you feel so strongly about this, you really should contact the NAE and straighten them out. Please let us know what they say.


Invoking intelligent design in science is like invoking gremlins in engineering. [after Mark Isaak.]
All models are wrong, some models are useful. - George E. P. Box

  14997 replies since July 17 2008,19:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (500) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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