I guess I am just in a replying mood, otherwise I would not engage in refuting such obvious falsehoods.
For God's sake and yours, please try to learn something here instead of promoting obvious crap that we can even trace to the source.
dkroemer writes:
Many scientists, mostly non-biologists or popular writers like Dawkins who are trying to promote atheistic humanism, think natural selection (please don't waste space by giving a lecture on natural selection) explains complexity. There are even quotes from Dawkins where he does not propagate such nonsense.
First, according to the last survey by Time magazine back in 1987, 99.85% of all bioscientists and geoscientists support the theory of evolution as the most likely explanation of what is observed on Earth concerning life. This percentage drops off amongst those who are less educated in the evidence, in accordance with their specialization, such as a little less physicists and chemists, a bit more with (unfortunately) engineers and of course much less with palm readers, astrologers, hookers, and false prophets.
Second, please provide any accurate quote from Dawkins indicating he questions the overall Theory of Evolution. We can wait, as we have been waiting since it was first implied.
The evidence that natural selection can't explain the complexity of life is the evidence supporting the second law of thermodynamics. There is a tendency in nature for systems of molecules to go towards a greater state of disorder. An example is the free expansion of a gas. There is less order in the expanded gas because there is less knowledge about the location of the gas molecules.
This is a tiresome, ignorant criticism of evolution. Usually the proponent is just parroting some crap they read from the tax criminal Hovind. Almost any first grader within 30 miles of a science and engineering university can refute this with the simple observation that the earth is not a thermodynamically closed system.
The reason why is called the sun, ultimate source of all energy on earth other than radioactive decay and geothermal heating due to gravity.
"P. falciparum, HIV, and E. coli are all very, very different from each other. They range from the simple to the complex, have very different life cycles, and represent three different fundamental domains of life: eukaryote, virus, and prokaryote. Yet they all tell the same tale of Darwinian evolution. Single simple changes to old cellular machinery that can help in dire circumstances are easy to come by. This is where Darwin rules, in the land of antibiotic resistance and single tiny stepsThere is no evidence that Darwinian process can take the multiple, coherent steps needed to build new molecular machinery, the kind of machinery that fills the cell." ( page 162 of The Edge of Evolution )
Behe is hardly a decent source, his testimony at Dover showed to the world he is not a credible source of anything remotely resembling the truth. If you so desire, a detailed criticism of his baloney can be made by various experts here, and if they are not forthcoming, I will do it myself.
Perhaps you should check out what Purpledawn and Dr Bill have to say about how to properly interpret the Bible around here, or check out RAZDs correlation thread before pretending to know more than virtually all Biblical scholars and scientists. And that is just a start.
BY the way, I am not an atheist, but I am a humanist. I don't do self hate for liars or con men.
Edited by anglagard, : take out extraneous word
Edited by anglagard, : forgot about the geothermal
The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
™ Version 4.2