"A self-styled form of Darwinian fundamentalism has risen to some prominence in a variety of fields, from the English biological heartland of John Maynard Smith to the uncompromising ideology (albeit in graceful prose) of his compatriot Richard Dawkins, to the equally narrow and more ponderous writing of the American philosopher Daniel Dennett . . . . - Stephen Jay Gould, "Darwinian Fundamentalism," The New York Review of Books.
One recent post contains this quote:
Harvard University has proven over the years that the more complex something is, the less likely you are to find any intelligence behind it.
I would almost contend that if something fits in with common sense it almost certainly isn't science.
posted by Lawrence Selden @ 12:56 PM
1 comments
I am a macroevolution agnostic. I used to accept evolutionary theory. Then I looked at the evidence. It became clear to me that macroevolutionary theory is built more on a priori philosophical assumptions than on evidence. Microevolution, on the other hand, is supported by the evidence. The distinction between the two is critical and is largely ignored, or not understood, by the mainstream media and general public.
1 Comments:
Hello Lawrence - just came across your blog via ScrappleFace. I appreciate your perspective and will be reading regularly.
Post a Comment
<< Home