The real reason why Darwinism cannot be disconfirmed
|February 5, 2008||Posted by O'Leary under Intelligent Design|
DESIGN OF LIFE: You interviewed 150 scientists for your film. I wonder if that’s a record. I gather an effort has been made to discredit the film on the grounds that the anti-ID folk were misrepresented, basically that you tricked them into taking part.
MATHIS: It’s not surprising. When you’re used to a situation where everything that is talked about in books and films fits your dogmatic view – and that’s what they’ve had – and then a film comes along that applies some actual skepticism, naturally they’re unhappy.
They had the list of questions we were going to be examining. A controversy takes at least two sides. But they’ve become very used to only one side.
Apparently they didn’t understand that we were really going to do just what we said we were going to do.
Well, I just had a similar experience to Mark’s. Get this:
I had been asked to contribute to a book that represented both sides, that is, both Darwinists and ID sympathizers. I picked an author to respond to. A bit of preliminary work demonstrated that this Darwinist simply did not understand the evidence-based problems with his position (which he probably regards as “overwhelmingly confirmed”).
Well, easy work for me, then: Explain what he left out. I was just trying to schedule time to write up my comments when I got mail from the project …
For more, go here.
Toddlers as Neanderthals?: Evolutionary psychology hits the affluent parent set
Straight talk about evolutionary psychology (another reason why it’s bunk)
“Actually, evolutionary psychology contains within itself the seed of its own downfall. Taken seriously, it means that precisely nothing has changed since the days of our prehuman ancestors. In that case, no evolution occurred. That is strange, considering the wonders Darwinists attribute to natural selection. And if nothing has changed between our prehuman ancestors and ourselves, has anything changed since the amoeba and ourselves, it is all the more strange, considering the further wonders they attribute to natural selection. ”
By the way, is anyone interested in knowing what kind of people are really mad about ID (as of 6:43 pm EST)? If they have smartened up since then, maybe I am a tonic. Should I be syndicated? I must call my agent. Yes, yes, of course I have an agent. Who doesn’t, nowadays?