Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
So, he has a degree in geology, and worked as a geophysicist. Then he got a PHd in the history and philosophy of science. Yet somehow, without having worked in biology, and without having a degree in that field, he is able to provide biological evidence for ID that everybody in that field seemed to miss. Interesting....
I also wonder why he starts by dividing evolution from God in a classic false dichotomy that creationists always use to appeal to people's religious convictions, instead of simply looking at the evidence and seeing where it goes.
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
So, he has a degree in geology, and worked as a geophysicist. Then he got a PHd in the history and philosophy of science. Yet somehow, without having worked in biology, and without having a degree in that field, he is able to provide biological evidence for ID that everybody in that field seemed to miss. Interesting....
I've finished the book. Very good book. I highly recommend it.
Your reasoning is faulty. Sound arguments are where you find them. To assume that only a person degreed in a subject can understand and discover in that subject is nothing more then an appeal to authority and on its face bogus.
I also wonder why he starts by dividing evolution from God in a classic false dichotomy that creationists always use to appeal to people's religious convictions, instead of simply looking at the evidence and seeing where it goes.
Your reasoning is faulty. Sound arguments are where you find them. To assume that only a person degreed in a subject can understand and discover in that subject is nothing more then an appeal to authority and on its face bogus.
It's called specialization. The author clearly did not specialize in biology, hence for him to make claims that DNA points towards ID (unlike every respected specialist on the matter) is a very weak thing. It's like going to a orthopedist (foot, muscle, or bone doctor) for cancer instead of an oncologist. Sure the orthopedist might find something new, but in the end the multiple oncologists will know much more about cancer than an orthopedist can hope for (unless he became an oncologist of course).
I program and manage game development tools and technology. I know a lot about art in games. In the end if I think I learned a new art aspect I would need an artist to really be sure. That doesn't mean I can't contribute to the art side, just that I need a specialist when I want to really address something or be sure of something.
It's called specialization. The author clearly did not specialize in biology, hence for him to make claims that DNA points towards ID (unlike every respected specialist on the matter) is a very weak thing. It's like going to a orthopedist (foot, muscle, or bone doctor) for cancer instead of an oncologist. Sure the orthopedist might find something new, but in the end the multiple oncologists will know much more about cancer than an orthopedist can hope for (unless he became an oncologist of course).
I program and manage game development tools and technology. I know a lot about art in games. In the end if I think I learned a new art aspect I would need an artist to really be sure. That doesn't mean I can't contribute to the art side, just that I need a specialist when I want to really address something or be sure of something.
Yes, I understand what specialization is. This does not change the truth of what I said. His reasoning is faulty and amounts to nothing more then an appeal to authority, which is a fallacy.
Yes, I understand what specialization is. This does not change the truth of what I said. His reasoning is faulty and amounts to nothing more then an appeal to authority, which is a fallacy.
It is a dead give-away for weak criticism.
Creationism is a better system when it "appreciates" evolution -- when it gets the clever, innovate parts -- even when it rejects it as untrue.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations") To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;
Yes, I understand what specialization is. This does not change the truth of what I said. His reasoning is faulty and amounts to nothing more then an appeal to authority, which is a fallacy.
Stephen Meyer will never be held accountable for his views. He doesn't work in a lab where his opinion makes a difference. He isn't being financed by a company who's success depends on accurate scientific results. The specialists in the field do have to be held accountable for their model of genetics and the evolution of them. They do work in labs where their opinions matter.
For paleontologists who search for fossils their funding depends on their success. They use the model of evolution and biogeography to locate potential fossils. If there was a better model (like flood geology) then they would use that because that is what would lead them to fossils. To search for oil, researches use stratigraphy and not a flood model. Guess what, they find oil with the gradual formation model. When new diseases strike us they are matched genetically to their closest ancestors based on their genetic makeup. If there was no nested hierarchy this wouldn't be possible. There are many examples of how the old earth and evolution models are practical in the field, and the people who emplore the use of these models are held accountable because their jobs depend on accurate scientific results.
Creationists can say whatever they want and as long as the donations poor in and the books sell, they'll never have to answer to anyone for their pseudo science. This is why I make the appeal to authority, because the specialists in the field need to be right, whereas Stephen Meyer can say anything he wants with no consequence to any scientific study.
And as far as the mockery of my appeal to authority, when you get in legal trouble you will find a lawyer who specializes in the area you need help in. When my baby girl had seizures we saw the pediactrics specialist in my area. When she ran out of tests she could do locally we were sent to Vancouver Children's hospital to see the Pediatrics neurologist. The point is, when the results acutally matter, we all seek out specialists.
And lastly, no major scientific breakthrough has ever been made by someone who is NOT a specialist in the related field. I.D. needs to have arbitrary court cases to plead their case because their pseudo science in meaningless in the lab. Can you think of any scientific discoveries that came to us by way of a legal trial?
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. (as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations") To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. in the presence of Him whom he believed--God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;
Linear Mode
