Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Saturday, November 28, 2020

Joe Felsenstein is Willfully Ignorant


Joe Felsenstein is proud to be willfully ignorant with respect to ID. Joe spews:

While Behe kept implying that his motives were purely scientific (and Josh agreed with him), it is interesting that he asked Josh whether Josh had a detailed explanation for the origin of (something – the flagellum?). Meanwhile Behe has his own arguments, which did not include a detailed explanation of the origin of, well, anything! The ID types keep saying that ID is a theory competing with “Darwinism”, when they present no such theory, but rather a collection of arguments about how “Darwinism” can’t account for the diversity of life. It’s just like saying “Here’s my theory: it’s that for reason X, Y, and Z your theory is no good!”

Umm, YOURS is the mechanistic position, Joe. Ever since Darwin who proclaimed to have a step-by-step process for producing the appearance of design with the need for an intelligent designer. 

On the other hand ID claims to have a step-by-step process for determining the existence of intelligent design. We don't have to know how in order to make that determination. We don't even ask about the how until after we determined it was designed. So again, reality dictates that the only way to make any determination about the who or how is by studying the design and all relevant evidence. We don't know how Stonehenge was made but we know it is artificial. Everything we know about it came from many years of study and research.

If we showed humans going into the lab and producing irreducible complexity, would that satisfy you, Joe? Could we then just say the intelligent designer did it like genetic engineers?


Post a Comment

<< Home