Over at his Why Evolution is True website, the infamous Jerry Coyne has given his lame excuses for not wanting to take up a genuine offer from ENV’s David Klinghoffer to debate and discuss Steve Meyer’s latest Book Darwin’s Doubt as well as discussing anything else Darwin related. In his “I’m too busy and important to do that’ rant he writes:
You ID advocates can also make your case, but the website rules are that we can then ask, before you post further, about your evidence for
GodThe Intelligent Designer.This is the last time I’ll be engaging the Discovery Institute directly on these issues. DIers are not scientists but religious zealots concealing clerical collars beneath threadbare lab coats. I will debate real scientific issues with other scientists, but not creationism with creationists who pretend to be scientists. After all, real scientists are open to reason, and don’t spend their time making up evidence to buttress a priori emotional commitments.
Notice how Coyne harkens back to the old canard of “yeah, well who’s the designer then, and where’s your evidence for his/her existence”. Clearly, Coyne is either clueless about what ID is really about or he does know and is deliberately misrepresenting it…take your pick.
As to the last sentence from Coyne, all I can say is in reply is, “No, only Darwinists do that”! The sad truth is that Coyne, like Dawkins and a few others, know deep down that in a real discussion where they would have to defend both their science and their philosophy with, you know, actual data and logic and reason, they’d get their clocks cleaned by anyone who knew what they were talking about, like Steve Meyer, Bill Dembski, or a host of others we could name.
So, I tell you what Dr. Jerry Coyne, I’ll come to your website and subject myself to the slings and arrows of your followers if you will answer but one simple scientific question. How do you know scientifically (no philosophy, metaphysics or theology allowed) that the properties of the Cosmos are such that any apparent design(s) we observe in Nature can not be actual design even in principle? There, simple question. Provide the science. Who conducted the studies to confirm the hypothesis, under what conditions and in what relevant peer reviewed scientific research journal can we read the findings? And I’d love for you to explain in detail how it might be falsified. Again, only science, no sneaking in philosophical presuppositions or assuming the point at issue. Answer that, Dr. Coyne, and I’ll come on Why Evolution is True and you can ask me whatever you like!
Of course, there is the possibility that you have an actual scientific answer to the question. Its a risk I’m willing to take because I already know you don’t! Why? Because no one does. If you have one, Dr. Coyne, you can expect to receive your Nobel Prize for the most ground breaking discovery in all of history!
Barring that, what is clear in your rant (and it IS a rant) is that you think your philosophical presuppositions are invisible and you’re only discussing actual science! That, and $2.10 will get you a Starbuck’s Grande.