http://www.idthefuture.com/2006/09/you_read_that_right.html
http://www.idthefuture.com/2006/09/coyne_versus_erwin_davidson_yo.html
http://www.idthefuture.com/2006/09/design_science.html
Q: Does it matter what anyone says is the truth in this matter?
A: Not to the average Darwinian fundamentalist.
They will find a way to squirm out of the evidence as usual - now matter how many principles of logic must be broken or bypassed to do so.
The universal answer to all Darwinism’s serious problems is “selection” - the evolutionist’s magic wand.
Like Dawkins, the recipe is tyically - take the data, add a cup of quaint just-so stories, mix with a pint of poorly thought out double talk, add a billion years or 2 and Presto chango we have entirely new, fundamentally different (morphologically), species with previously unfound traits and complex, concurrent, synchronized functionalities! Mutational Concurrency is the chief problem in virtually all Darwinian path way scenarios.
Just like the faery-taled frog to prince, this molecule to human morphing is easy with time and random mutations! Only in Darwinian thought of course since no empirical evidence or proof of this ever having occurred is available. Darwinists use circular reasoning to get around this though: "It must have occurred since there is no other materialist explanation".
Forget that most mutations are negative or neutral and that negative mutations are always detrimental and often lethal. Forget that randomness never ever produces ordered functionality in anything at all. Forget that there are known limitations to any species’ ability to adapt or morph. Forget that all the time available is still vastly insufficient for the standard macro-evo model to produce anything like a hundred million different complex life forms. Forget the fact that recent studies suggest that at current estimates of mutation rates the human race could never have evolved to our current state from molecule, given the level of bad mutations (bugs in the genetic code). Forget the fact that NO macro-evo mutational pathway from molecule to complex, reproductive life form has ever been rationally, much less empircally, demonstrated.
None of this matters. Darwinism must be true because we simply cannot allow a possible Intelligent Agent in the door. Why? Because it has deep metaphysical implications. For the adamant evolutionist neo-Darwinism must be true - no matter how much the evidence points to some super intelligence behind life - because they want it to be true - because metaphysical explanations (except the more subtle Darwinian kind) are to be ruled out from the start all the way to the finish.
This is why we now have “designoids”. A quaint invention of Dawkins to deny any possibility of intelligent design in nature. It is in reality an irrational substitute for any empirical evidence against design. Designoids - things that supposedly only “look like” real designs! Incredibly foolish when you stop to reflect on the implications of this - “appearance of deisgn but no real deisgn”?!
Proof? No. Just more “explaning away” to avoid the obvious and most simple explanation. Occams razor come to mind?
All the evidence points to design. Otherwise why does the great Darwinist high preist have to invent designoids in the 1st place?! Isn't it perfectly clear? If it looks designed, and fills all the criteria of deisgn detection methods, then it most likely is designed!
Humans have the ability to instinctively recognize things that stand out as design versus natural random patterns. So Dawkins' designoids are in fact an irrational response to what we intuitively see as design by abductive reasoning.
Darwinism says, “If it looks designed it is a mere illusion since we cannot allow it to actually be designed because we don't permit any metaphysical implications (except our own) in our materialist science.”
As the apostle Paul wrote “science falsely so-called” - applies well here.
All too obvious for an unbiased observer.
See also my articles on SETI and ID, Information in DNA etc.
