Jun 26
2008
Why I stay out of the evolution debate
Posted at 3:55 pm in Christian LivingAdd comments
Reason #3,428 why I don’t follow the evolution debate that closely - it’s way too much work when, before you can even get to studying the facts, you have to know who all the players are to know whether they can be believed. For example - Michael Behe is not to be trusted.
I’m just not willing to invest the time to do it. Henry, however, is willing, so I rely on him to do my homework for me because I know he’ll do a good job.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Slander. Knowledge of grammar tells us that there is little difference between a colon and a period. And anyone who has studied the debate knows instantly that critiquing the neo-Darwinian view is not the same thing as critiquing evolution as a whole. There are other views about how evolution could happen, but in my humble opinion, all the “hopeful monster” type evolution theories are mere fantasy. The neo-Darwinian view is the most realistic, and pointing out disagreement about it is relevant in showing that scientists are unsure about the entire doctrine. Do not say someone is untrustworthy just because they leave an irrelevant elipsis out a quotation. The original author could have made his point equally well if he had used a period instead of a colon.
June 27th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Folks who say Michael Behe is not to be trusted are not to be trusted. That’s why I stay out of the debate.
June 28th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Just as a note, since I was referenced in the post, I would say that despite anything said about Michael Behe, he is an excellent writer and if you are going to read only one book about intelligent design, it should be Darwin’s Black Box.
I don’t agree with him. In fact, I’m very much opposed to ID, but he is well worth reading so you know what ID advocates are saying.