Evolutionists lack of arguments
The lack of arguments in defending evolution continues to amaze. Creation Safari's has a good roundup. All it really comes down to is the evolutionists are trying to force their opinions rather than provide a justification for them. personally, I think all of us who think common descent evolution is fatally flawed are being done a great favor by the lack of serious argument, because the general public is allowed to see how shaky evolutionary theory really is when it's proponents do not defend it with science and reason.

Answers in Genesis has a good response to a medical journals promotion of anti-theism. Of particular interest is one comment they make

Note that when evolution was largely banned in schools during the alleged scientific nadir for decades after the Scopes Trial, American schools produced more Nobel prizes than the rest of the world combined. In fact, America produced twice as many as all other countries—this was especially pronounced in the biological arena of the Nobels (physiology and medicine), supposedly a field that can’t do without evolution.

That puts paid to many of the complaints about teaching creation or ID doesn't it. Of course, I would like to see the basis of this claim.

Steve Jones, a retired biologist from Western Australia has a great set of responses to a journalist about Intelligent design. Of particular note is his generous use of evolutionists own claims. Of course, the zealous evolutionist will claim that he is quoting out of context. Judge for yourself

"I well remember how the [Neo-Darwinian] synthetic theory beguiled me with its unifying power when I was a graduate student in the mid-1960's. Since then I have been watching it slowly unravel as a universal description of evolution. The molecular assault came first, followed quickly by renewed attention to unorthodox theories of speciation and by challenges at the level of macroevolution itself. I have been reluctant to admit it-since beguiling is often forever-but if Mayr's characterization of the synthetic theory is accurate, then that theory, as a general proposition, is effectively dead, despite its persistence as textbook orthodoxy." (Gould S.J., "Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?," Paleobiology, Vol. 6, No. 1, January 1980, p.120)

. Read the whole (long) post.
- posted by Alan Grey @ Wednesday, October 26, 2005