Within the first 20 seconds...Dr. Stephen Meyer and Dr. John Ankerberg explore the problems with neo-Darwinism, and the suddenness of the Cambrian Explosion.
Is it sound argument or otherwise?
Within the first 20 seconds...
...Darwin's theory of evolution is presented in schools as an established fact rather than a theory...
Stopped watching at that point. It's clearly aimed at morons.
Stuart
It's probably at least two logical fallacies as well.That's provocative.
What do you think is the best argument against evolution in his video?
Within the first 20 seconds...
...Darwin's theory of evolution is presented in schools as an established fact rather than a theory...
Stopped watching at that point. It's clearly aimed at morons.
Stuart
We palaeontologists say that the history of life supports this interpretation (ie gradual change), all the while really knowing it does not.
What do you think is the best argument against evolution in his video?
The original Dr John video was great and shows that evolution is built on a foundation of sand (or is that precambrian muck) and cannot explain the sudden explosion of complex organisms from most Phyla still extant today.
The Economist video explained nothing, but had the same tired and irrelevant arguments that bilateral symmetry or eyes somehow speeds up evolution. But we want to know where those eyes and bilateral symmetry came from in the first place, and even more than that, where complex organisms with eyes and bilateral symmetry such as Trilobites, came from.
The original Dr John video was great and shows that evolution is built on a foundation of sand (or is that precambrian muck) and cannot explain the sudden explosion of complex organisms from most Phyla still extant today.
The Economist video explained nothing, but had the same tired and irrelevant arguments that bilateral symmetry or eyes somehow speeds up evolution. But we want to know where those eyes and bilateral symmetry came from in the first place, and even more than that, where complex organisms with eyes and bilateral symmetry such as Trilobites, came from.
Where did they come from iouae?
Hi Sonnet
In your previous post you wrote "And not just the Cambrian Explosion - the angiosperm big boom and the mammalian radiation."
Each "big boom" or "explosion" or "radiation" event where the curtain comes down on one group of plants and animals, and the curtain rises to reveal another, completely new biome - this is God the Creator, creating. This tells us what God does - He creates, and the fossil record is a record of what God has been doing over the last 5 billion years. And in the universe and stars, we see what God has been doing for the last 13.75 billion years.
Thanks. Is the criticism of the missing links that Meyer and others point to as problematic for neo-Darwinists as they suggest?
Alright, I made myself watch it.
I was right in my prejudice, it is made for morons.
But here's one that respects the intelligence of its viewers:
Stuart
I am not able to speak for neo-Darwinists, but it should be problematic for them.
I blame Christians for not providing a credible and scientifically viable explanation for the record in the rocks. Evolutionists and Creationists are equally to blame for the ignorance out there. And the record in the rocks shouts one thing clearly. There has been massive creativity of living things in the past and present. And these arrive suddenly, and disappear suddenly, to be replaced by new, fully stocked ecosystems which are perfectly balanced. God should be getting the credit for all these marvels.
What do you think is the valid query?It might also be a valid query. Nile Eldredge said this didn't he?
What do you think is the valid query?
Stuart
What about Noah, Adam and Eve etc?