What perplexes me is that Darwinists, when confronted with the astronomically sophisticated technology found in a “simple” living cell, continue to defend the proposed Darwinian process of chance, physical law and natural selection as a plausible explanation, when there is no evidence of this degree of creative power through such a mechanism, and that their proposition defies logic and even the most trivial analytical scrutiny.
But it gets worse. They go much further than just attempting to defend such transparent irrationality. They propose that their fantasies are established, incontrovertible, scientific fact, when nothing could be further from the truth.
And it gets worse still. These people insist that other people’s children must be indoctrinated with this stuff in government funded public education, and insist that no challenges to Darwinian orthodoxy (no matter how scientific, rational, evidential, or mathematical) can be tolerated.
Many of the people who propose such ideas and policies are highly intelligent and well-educated. So what goes? What do they have to fear?
The intellectually honest (and intellectually fulfilled atheist) Darwinist should just say the following:
You ID guys have made some good points. But I won’t, and never will, accept design as an explanation, because this is philosophically unacceptable to me. Furthermore, my goal is to suppress all dissent from my philosophical commitment, by whatever means.
Why don’t Darwinists just say what they mean?