Home » Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, News » ID is dead already? Didn’t you know? – Darwinist Jason Rosenhouse

ID is dead already? Didn’t you know? – Darwinist Jason Rosenhouse

In “Twenty Years After Darwin on Trial, ID is Dead” (Evolutionblog , November 29, 2011), Jason Rosenhouse claims – Denis Venema-style – to have once taken ID seriously but not any more:

Not so today. Consider the two biggest ID books of recent years. Michael Behe’s follow-up book, The Edge of Evolution, dropped like a stone. It got a few perfunctory reviews written by scientists who perked up just long enough to note its many errors, and then everyone ignored it. Frankly, even the ID folks don’t seem to talk about it very much. Stephen Meyer’s book Signature in the Cell was likewise met with crickets. It briefly seemed like a big deal, a big book released by a mainstream publisher, but scientists gave it a scan, saw nothing remotely new, and yawned.

The ID blogs are hardly in any better shape.

Hmmm. If that’s true, why have we lived through three server upgrades at UD in the last five years?

Oh, right. 100% spam and DDOS attempts.

Hat tip: Telic Thoughts.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

21 Responses to ID is dead already? Didn’t you know? – Darwinist Jason Rosenhouse

  1. Come on Rosenhouse. Log on to UD and let’s talk about it. Surely you have nothing to fear from the dead, right?

  2. Jason, I just read your post. You really need to log on to UD and school me about the current state of the argument for design. I’m just one of those poor souls fallen into the vacuity of ID; it should be easy for you verify your opinions on me, right? A day in the park. I promise to only bring up one or two subjects, and I’ll even beg the UD moderators not to bannish you for being too powerful an intellect. Let’s test your opinions against the observable evidence, it’ll be fun.

  3. This is typical Darwinist rhetoric. Declare something to be true in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is not. I fail to understand how they really expect people to take them seriously.

  4. It’s actually quite sad. All they’re capable of doing these days is knocking ID, as the more we learn about the interconnected complexities of the cell the more neo-Darwinism falls so far short; proving just how impotent it really is in creating anything even close to what we see.

    Well at least it gives them something to do, apart from having to continually ‘twist’ the data to fit the theory of course :)

  5. 5
    englishmaninistanbul

    HONK IF YOU DON’T EXIST

  6. 6

    As a Former believer in Darwinian evolution (theistic evolution) it is like a breath of fresh air to be free from that rediculous fairy tales pseudo science and see the incredibly intricate design of life. I’ll never look at the DVD walking with mammals in the same way again, unless I need a good ambulotcetas laugh.

    I was having an interesting discussion with a believer in Darwinian evolution the other day who claimed that it’s fact. I then preceded to ask for the transitional fossils and his response was ” we don’t need fossils to prove evolution. Loool at that point I just threw my hands up and left.

    Uncommon descent has been a blessing n my life

  7. Honk honk!!!

  8. “Scientists gave it a scan, saw nothing remotely new, and yawned.”

    This is what people do who are unable to face an opposing idea.

  9. “The Edge of Evolution?, dropped like a stone. It got a few perfunctory reviews written by scientists who perked up just long enough to note its many errors, and then everyone ignored it.”

    Really? errors? Many people found this to be an excellent book including atheist John Mcwhorter, an intelligent man, although not a scientist, said the book made a big impression on him. His honest video caused some controversy over at bloggingheads if I remember correctly… http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/22075

    “Stephen Meyer?’s book Signature in the Cell was likewise met with crickets. It briefly seemed like a big deal, a big book released by a mainstream publisher, but scientists gave it a scan, saw nothing remotely new, and yawned.”

    Really? A big seller as well as many positive reviews written, including an excellent one by software engineer Harry Kanigel. http://tinyurl.com/d7rl3ds
    Don’t the Darwinists read this stuff?

    The level of dishonesty from some Darwinists astounds me.

  10. “The level of dishonesty from some Darwinists astounds me.”

    Sad but true. Arguably, it could be thought of as science some 150 years ago. In any case, it is no longer science but ideology. Many people either don’t see it or don’t want to acknowledge it. When an idea prevails and remains in control over minds for too long, it often becomes an inhibitor, hardens and ends up degenerating into an ideology.

  11. Beep, beep, honk, honk!

  12. Hooooooooonk……!

  13. “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated”
    - Mark Twain

  14. What are the facts.? is this a sharp analysis?
    It seems creationisms are more famous, more feared, and mpre political then ever in history.
    It seems even political candidates have to weigh in on who’s right.
    Everywhere on PBS and any recent books dealing with evolution and company they either mention or you can tell its on their mind that creationism(s) are popular, punchy, and progressing in gaining and winning audiences.
    DEAD!
    Well then evolution thumpers cease and desist with the open and secret opposition!
    Relax!
    In fact I think this guy has a blog on the whole subject.
    Well put a fork in it, Your done.
    Tell us when garage sell is on for office supplies.

  15. 15

    No one will touch those fundamental arguments. After the moran and liddle episodes, don’t expect too many takers.

  16. Signature in the Cell currently holds a four-star rating (the average customer review) at Amazon.com and has 313 reviews. That’s hardly grounds for calling it ‘ignored’.

    Here are Amazon’s stats:
    Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #28,754 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
    #12 in Books > Medical Books > Basic Sciences > Genetics
    #24 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Religious Studies > Science & Religion
    #75 in Books > Professional & Technical > Professional Science > Evolution

    Mr. Rosenhouse, do some research before you write. That way we’ll be able to take you seriously next time.

  17. I see too many scientists in a life and death struggle with the dirt. Heads in the ground with their butts in the air, where the real life and answers are to be found.

    What really, are there facts for.

    1 life comes from life
    2 a human comes from humans
    3 there is design in life.

    Does anyone have any evidence that is against this?
    And why do some scientists go against all 3 of these facts?

  18. I will echo your sentiment. Every chance I get, I inform people of ID to the best of my abilities and to be honest, most are very receptive.. Keep up the good work UD.

  19. What has really killed ‘abiogenesis and ‘evolution’ is DNA. But some scientists do not know it yet.

  20. I am interested in posting an article. I am not sure how you go about that here? Can some help with that?
    Thanks

  21. Yes Jason, when you don’t have any arguments against your opponent nor any arguments for your position, just baldly declare your opponent’s position is dead and hopefully no one will notice all the other stuff.

    “Nothing to see here, move along”

    Bald declarations are much easier than actually stepping up and doing some real scientific research…

Leave a Reply