RE: DNA, IC, natural selection and debating a Creationist
June 7, 2011 at 8:04 pm
(This post was last modified: June 7, 2011 at 8:08 pm by Anymouse.)
"Creationism" makes the assumption that all theories are equal in worth and value, and therefore worthy of debate as an equal to other theories, such as organic evolution.
However, all theories are not equal in worth and value. Hardly anyone to-day debates the merits of spontaneous generation, and that's a theory, too. Or the Earth's position at the centre of the solar system. Or the indivisibility of an atom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation (this article includes a long discussion of how Christianity adopted spontaneous generation as "proof" of Genesis by scientists.)
Creationism (or its rebranding, Intelligent Design), is not worthy of debate as an equal to evolution, any more than spontaneous generation. If the IC folk can come up with some real evidence to support their hypothesis, then it might be worthy of debate.
However, all theories are not equal in worth and value. Hardly anyone to-day debates the merits of spontaneous generation, and that's a theory, too. Or the Earth's position at the centre of the solar system. Or the indivisibility of an atom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation (this article includes a long discussion of how Christianity adopted spontaneous generation as "proof" of Genesis by scientists.)
Creationism (or its rebranding, Intelligent Design), is not worthy of debate as an equal to evolution, any more than spontaneous generation. If the IC folk can come up with some real evidence to support their hypothesis, then it might be worthy of debate.
"Be ye not lost amongst Precept of Order." - Book of Uterus, 1:5, "Principia Discordia, or How I Found Goddess and What I Did to Her When I Found Her."
