Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr170IQ; PatrickHenry
The Darwinist answer was immediate. Unfortunately, it was also illogical, personal, and unscientific. The main points are:

1. Intelligent Design is just Creation Science in a new suit (name-calling).

2. Don't listen to these guys, they're not real scientists (credentialism).

3. If you actually understood science as we do, you'd realize that these guys are wrong and we're right; but you don't, so you have to trust us (expertism).

4. They got some details of those complex systems wrong, so they must be wrong about everything (sniping).

5. The first amendment requires the separation of church and state (politics).

6. We can't possibly find a fossil record of every step along the way in evolution, but evolution has already been so well-demonstrated it is absurd to challenge it in the details (prestidigitation).

7. Even if there are problems with the Darwinian model, there's no justification for postulating an "intelligent designer" (true).

Let's take these points in turn:

I nominate this article for the Darwin Central "Golden Fossil" award, for the most classic strawman argument. Here in 7 strawman points, the author builds a bogus case that he can knock down.

68 posted on 01/19/2006 9:33:09 AM PST by narby (Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: narby
Here in 7 strawman points, the author builds a bogus case that he can knock down.

Maybe he's not been informed that the only GOOD Strawman is an E-strawman!

95 posted on 01/19/2006 10:21:55 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

To: narby
Actually, not all of them are strawman. Just from a glance, I can tell you right away that #7 is true -- finding holes in evolution (which ID-pushers have failed to do) would not amount to evidence for ID. Also #1 is true as well. The poster neglects to mention that the claim referenced by #1 is made with a sizeable amount of supporting evidence.
118 posted on 01/19/2006 10:46:10 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

To: narby
nominate this article for the Darwin Central "Golden Fossil" award ...

The Grand Master has thought about reinstating the awards program. (It was discontinued after Jimmy Swaggart won the top prize seven years in a row.) Would you like to take responsibility for it? It would be subject to the GM's approval, of course, but he likes to see his operatives demonstrating initiative.

On behalf of the Grand Master, I am,
PatrickHenry

125 posted on 01/19/2006 10:56:37 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson