RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (501) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 3, The Beast Marches On...< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1267
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2010,10:24   

Quote (dheddle @ July 16 2010,06:41)
To be honest, I don't see why your are upset. Any mention of evolution does appear to be gratuitous. The original source did not present a evolutionary pathway. It is not unfair to say their paper has nothing to do with evolution.

Not that it matters much, but what you quoted probably came from an editor. The other mention of evolution:

 
Quote
Existence of similar adhesion strategies in distantly related species of animals suggests a common design principle in the evolution of natural adhesives,” Blackledge says.


is just as much prima facie support for ID, since they would argue that the designer reuses design patterns.

Unless I missed something it is hard to find fault in the IDers citing this particular paper.  (Qualifier: The accompanying youtube didn't play--so my comments don't reflect whatever is in the video.)

Hi, thanks for getting back to me.
I agree with your analysis of the sentence you quoted; it could be used to support ID, and the research does not deal with evolution at all.
In fact, the authors of the research use the word scarcely, so for instance
Quote
Nature has evolved a myriad of well-designed adhesives that assist in locomotion, self-defence and prey capture.

http://tinyurl.com/37gwu55
However, it does not pass unnoticed: IDiots dismiss it with
Quote
Whilst this research is a splendid example of empirical science in action (understanding how the natural world operates), the issue of origins is raised in this paper. An evolutionary framework is adopted, not because the research is dependent on that framework, but because papers that refer to design (especially "well-designed" features) apparently need to affirm non-intelligent causation.

http://tinyurl.com/2wjz9lt
So they operate with double standards: When those scientists talk about evolution, they don't mean it, it's just to appease Darwinist watchdogs. OTOH, when they say "well-designed", it's about Teh Design ™.

So, maybe I went over the top with my enraged comment. Now, I am just sad that an amazing and promising discovery is being used to make a point for ID.

Sorry if I was incoherent, I am sitting in a puddle of sweat with a rooom temperature of 37 centigrades, outside it's 39.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
  15001 replies since Sep. 04 2009,16:20 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (501) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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