Wednesday, January 2, 2008

A friend sent a link to a YouTube video saying the theory of evolution is dead. These are all about the same, and usually rehash each other's arguments, rather than fresh ones. anyone who says that scientific data has destroyed the theory of evolution is either an idiot or hoping the audience are idiots; there is no third option. there is no such collapse of evolution. most people (when i say most, i mean everyone i have seen thus far) who has a problem with the current model of evolution have demonstrated that they do not understand how it works: the time scales involved, mechanisms of single point substitutions, recombination, gene cassettes, endogenous retroviruses, etc. all of these together can do very powerful things to the genome of an organism.

my main problem with ID is the completely adolescent, illogical philosophy of it: the origins of life are far too complicated to explain, so to explain them, we believe that something even more complicated created it. this immediately fails Ockham's Razor.

evolution is not complete, but it is still the best explanation given all the evidence. and filling in the unknowns with God is absurd. just because we don't know (yet) is a silly reason to ascribe the phenomenon to some space pixie (especially a pixie as described by Judeo-Christian mythology, myths that are contradictory, asinine, etc.) If there is a god-like being(s), it bears no resemblance to our concept of God. such beliefs, to me, are childish and pathetic, the height of delusion. people are afraid of life, its dangerous, so they fabricate this bullshit to comfort themselves. when i argue with Christians about their mythology (eg we can stone someone to death for working on the Sabbath), i almost always get them to admit that they believe because to not believe is too scary/depressing. that is the very definition of delusion.

there is no evidence to support this. none. any supposed evidence is just bad logic or pseudoscience masquerading as evidence. for a mind-numbing experience, dig into the blogosphere on this:

Two good places to start:

Google for Michael Behe, professor at Lehigh in PA, a leading proponent of ID:

most of his arguments do not stand up to rigorous scientific or logical examination, but he is the flipside, pro-ID voice. do some reading, evaluate the evidence, there will be a quiz.

No comments: