Joined: Oct. 2005
I appreciate your conviction and I understand how important it is to you.
But I’m with Dr. Dembski on this.
I’ve read Denton and Behe and they are convincing.
In my opinion, the concept of “irreducible complexity” simply nukes in toto the concept of macro-evolution.
For analogy, the design of Da Vinci’s “Last Supper” and its production are complete in one life time. All of Da Vinci’s paintings bear a striking resemblance, but the one painting on the wall of the dining hall of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan was drawn from raw materials right then and there: he didn’t assemble parts of paintings he had gathered from elsewhere.
Micro-evolution, I agree all day long. It’s a fact, no question.
We see it in action on every cattle ranch in Texas. (I’m from Texas.)
Comment by Red Reader — January 23, 2006 @ 65 pm
What evidence do you use to prove that macroevolution is “settled science”? Can you give me some resources (web sites, papers, books, etc.) which site evidence used in your proofs? In other words, please direct me to resources that would debunk the theory that the human body, for example, wasn’t designed in a day instead of billions of years.
Comment by saxe17 — January 23, 2006 @ 6:24 pm
LOL! Now the anti-"macro"evolution nuts on UD are asking DaveScot for evidence which proves his case. Let's see how successful DaveScot at convincing IDers of the facts of common descent and "macro" evolution.