Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

The evolution debate: dog chasing its tail…

November 23rd, 2017 · No Comments

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/new-york-times-permits-intelligent-design-proponents-to-speak-for-themselves-yes-really/

Conventional science is in a constant brouhaha with critics of evolution, but there is a way out that is not considered: we see it in a different way in the eonic effect: brand of ‘atheist’ design argument is needed to be able to look at design questions without theology.

After all, however much scientists deplore creationism the fact remains that darwinism is a flawed science, to say the least, and no social party should be required to take it on faith in the public sphere or in the classroom. We might note in passing that while theistic creationism is grossly mythological there are any number of versions of creationism at any level and with any ‘Factor X’ instead of God. Theistic evolutionism and/or creationism misses the point that ‘design’, if not Intelligent Design, is a natural process, while scientists are simply our in left field as darwinists.
Science cannot explain the evolution of complex machines using ideas of random evolution. No use castigating creationists if you think darwinism explains the complex flagelllum. Focrcing the secular public into such beliefs with all the social conditioning apparatus in high gear is not science and it has rendered the scientific public into near idiots.
Design arguments are really about teleological issues and science has failed to deal with these.

A look at the eonic model can be an introduction to this (and that model makes no direct use of teleological concepts, approaching the subject indirectly). The question of ‘intelligent design’ is the last stand of theology, it seems, although the ID group in many cases has tried to mediate the term beyond theism, up to a point. The problem is that ‘intelligence’ in nature has not been properly defined. We cannot say that ‘intelligence’ in nature is evidence of a designer.
The question of cosmic evolution remains unsolved. Scientists are right in rejecting naive creationism but they can’t pretend they have the answer either.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment