Joined: Feb. 2008
|Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ April 25 2010,23:31)|
|It's the complete lack of drive to examine any element of his/her own position. E.g., promoting irreducible complexity as an issue without having examined IC or CSI in any detail.|
Agreed. And perhaps worse, after being confronted with the various shortcomings of IC/CSI arguments (my bold):
|Quote (bjray @ April 22 2010,21:41)|
Btw, I will comment that I did read that the Dover case "proved" along with some other work that IC has already been proved that it COULD happen through natural causes. (ok, interesting stuff, I'll look more into that. Thanks.) This is not something earth-shattering to me. Matter a fact, I already knew that evolutionary proponents had written material attempting to explain their side. It's interesting stuff.
Then why did you bring IC up in the first place, bjray ? Are we expected to believe that you thoroughly analyzed these arguments and found them wanting ? Well no, you already admitted you didn't understand the ID side of the argument in depth, never mind the counter arguments.
(side note, I brought up the Dover case, not because it "proved" this, but because the transcript provides a clear, easily accessible explanation of the point)
I agree there is something to the "silver bullet" theory. I've seen much the same behavior from 9/11 "truthers" and similar.