This ad will close in 15 seconds

From : Thunderf00t
Added: May 22, 2009
So our initial video to the Discovery Institute got two replies within the last week. The first came by way of the DI fellow William Dembskis blog, uncommon descent http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/pz-myers-throws-down-a-gauntlet-to-id/ Who actually addressed their response to the well known science blog of PZ Myers of Pharyngula (recommended) http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/ the second came directly from DI Staff Casey Luskin. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/05/does_any_critic_out_there_unde.html#fn1 Casey has just earn himself the spotlight in WDPLAC part 30. This video deals mostly with the first reply, that deemed that a designer couldnt possibly left signs of a gene with a non-evolutionary origin. Yup thats right, apparently the intelligent designer is only capable of producing genes that are utterly indistinguishable from those produced by evolutionary processes. Hmmm. Anyway, the reply then rolls off into a straw-maned quote-mine of a BASIC Evolution vs Creationism textbook- yeah, I know exactly what you are thinking what a peculiar way to defend intelligent design Eventually it boils down to the staple of creationism, -same genes, same designer. This argument has been hammered many times with things like pseudo genes. What sort of designer makes genes, then switches them off etc etc etc. Eventually the quote-mined-straw-man of the creationists gets the only reply that its worthy of.
Category : Education

Video Categories:

Also Try: