RE: Stephen Meyer
January 12, 2015 at 9:27 am
(This post was last modified: January 12, 2015 at 9:49 am by Mudhammam.)
(January 12, 2015 at 9:08 am)Alex K Wrote: Pickup,Well, the only ID argument I have taken the time to examine is Michael Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box. Apart from the fact that I agree with Peter Atkins' review (http://infidels.org/library/modern/peter.../behe.html), I do think it highlights some challenging issues regarding exactly how chemistry evolved in such a manner on the basis of natural selection. Of course, one could throw in abiogenesis here, but granting life, I'm still not aware of an account that satisfactorily resolves how these mechanisms took shape.
the criticism they do offer concerning complexity is, according to real evolutionary biologists, amateurish. How do you gather that the IDers have something valid to criticize that isn't already better addressed by the pros?
Also, that's not to say I doubt Neo-Darwinism is correct, but given my understanding of its current formulation, I wonder if it is a theory that can resolve all of our questions about evolution or if on certain facts it is analogous to attempting to explain quantum gravity using Newtonian physics?
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
