Evo-News reports on the plight of mainstream Darwin critics. And these critics can hardly be called that.
Writing about Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Michael Chorost’s basic point is that scientists and science writers have long been saying that evolution appears to have direction built somehow into it. He is careful to remind us that those who say this aren’t in the camp of intelligent design:
Yet some scientists think that increases in complexity also happen “actively,” that is, driven by physical laws that directly favor increases in complexity. As a group, these scientists have no sympathy for intelligent design. However, they do see reasons to think that seen as a whole, life does go from simple to complex, from instinctual to intellectual. And they are asking if there are fundamental laws of nature that make it happen.
All sides of this ‘debate’ refuse to consider the careful exposition of the way directionality works in world history. I think that the rigidity of the academic/scientific world on Darwinism condemns the whole of science. The confusion goes on and on and on, and even mild critics such as Nagel get in trouble.