Hermagoras
Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007
|
Hunter has responded to me, after a fashion, but I can't make head or tail of it. Is he always this incoherent?
NB: ======== is used instead of quote marked or block quote paragraphs, so the bits between those ======== are from me. A Cornelius Hunter idiosyncracy.
| Quote | Hermagoras:
========
What a bizarre post. You have Didier Raoult, an MD/PhD enamored of the philosophical theories of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari (not surprising, given that he's French and that he works in infectious diseases like Rickettsia), proposing a change in the *metaphor* for evolution (not a new one, since Deleuze and Guattari proposed something similar decades ago -- see *A Thousand Plateaus*). How this event "is a good example of evolution’s folly" is obvious only to you.
========
And anyone else familiar with the evidence. The fact that Raoult takes a position outside the mainstream does not mean the evidence he grapples with doesn't matter. This is a good example of your folly because it is a manifestation of the evidential problems that have been there all along.
=====
So what? IDers are constrained by the conceptual trends of 500 years ago.
=====
Ah, yes, it always goes back to those rascals. What would you do without them? |
--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB
http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com
|
