03.31.07
Posted in Evolution at 9:49 pm by nemo
Comment on “Darwin delay”
Stephen P. Smith said,
Why would Darwin delay such an earth shaking discovery?
Good question. A man as ambitious as Darwin clearly was when confronted with being upstaged by Wallace seems unlikely to wait so long to publish his ‘theory’.
This study of the question, by a Darwinist, is typical of the way these things get ‘researched’ by ‘experts’ who have ‘read all the relevant literature’, thus leaving the amateur stranded, unable to replicate the amount of effort. Note how many of the standard objections to Darwin’s theory have gotten this treatment. It leaves critics befuddled, unless they get wise to the game, and stop taking these pronouncements at face value. The study here is commendable, bravo, pat on the back, but I don’t trust anything produced by official biologists anymore, so we will automatically have to be wary. Rule: never trust anything these Darwinists say, ex cathedra.
Anyway, it is somehow obvious, as you note in the way you phrase your question, that something is fishy here. I have always thought so.
To me it is obvious, almost an hypothesis: Darwin was unsure of his theory. He was right to be unsure, the theory doesn’t work. He missed the larger picture. But when Wallace came up with his version and sent his famous letter to Darwin, he leapt to the task of establishing his priority, with his cronies in tow. It is a disgraceful episode (lurking in the background of this account). Clearly Darwin was suffering from a desire to be original. Evolution was established. He could only make a name for himself with something decisive and new: natural selection seemed to foot the bill, but he must have sensed it wasn’t up to the job. Everyone else realized natural selection wouldn’t work, and many were really annoyed Darwin could get away with what he did.
The temptation is there: hype it and be famous, or be truthful and …
So the whole sorry game would be ridiculous if we could get past it. And I marvel at the amount of energy Darwinists expend on defending Darwin. Why not just move on?
![[Slashdot]](http://slashdot.org/favicon.ico)
![[Digg]](http://digg.com/favicon.ico)
![[Reddit]](http://reddit.com/favicon.ico)
![[del.icio.us]](http://del.icio.us/favicon.ico)
![[Facebook]](http://www.facebook.com/favicon.ico)
![[Technorati]](http://technorati.com/favicon.ico)
![[Google]](http://www.google.com/favicon.ico)
Permalink
Posted in Science & Religion at 4:10 pm by nemo
Humanists, ‘Atheist Fundamentalists’ Clash Over Disbeliefs.
We will soon have rival atheist cults, with agnostics subjected to excommunication.
BOSTON (AP) - Atheists are under attack these days for being too militant, for not just disbelieving in religious faith but for trying to eradicate it. And who’s leveling these accusations? Other atheists, it turns out.
Among the millions of Americans who don’t believe God exists, there’s a split between people such as Greg Epstein, who holds the partially endowed post of humanist chaplain at Harvard University, and so-called “New Atheists.”
Epstein and other humanists feel their movement is on the verge of explosive growth, but are concerned it will be dragged down by what they see as the militancy of New Atheism.
Permalink
Posted in Evolution at 6:43 pm by nemo
A new fundamentalism? Some decry strident tone of fellow atheists
BOSTON Atheists are under attack these days for being too militant.
Humanist Atheists are worried that a new breed of Atheists are not content with just disbelieving in religious faith — they are also trying to eradicate it.
The most pre-eminent New Atheists include best-selling authors Richard Dawkins — who has called the God of the Old Testament “a psychotic delinquent” — and Sam Harris, who foresees global catastrophe unless faith is renounced.
They say religious belief is so harmful it must be defeated and replaced by science and reason.
But Harvard University’s humanist chaplain Greg Epstein and other others feel their movement’s potential for explosive growth may be dragged down by what they see as the militancy of New Atheism.
Epstein calls them “atheist fundamentalists,” rigid in their dogma and intolerant.
He plans to provide a counterpoint to the New Atheists as Harvard celebrates the 30th anniversary of its humanist chaplaincy next month.
http://www.eyewitnessnewstv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6304606&nav=menu20_3
Permalink
03.29.07
Posted in Evolution at 4:56 pm by nemo
Comment: More propaganda from Darwin gang
…it’s really the issue of natural selection and its supposed consequences that is the common denominator
And what consequences might those be?
Many! Social Darwinism, for openers.
But in general the total inability of Darwinism to portray of realistic portrait of man
Permalink
« Previous entries