From the National Center for Science Education.
PS. The eye is supposedly “irreducibly complex” as creationists would like us to believe…
1. Diah
Oh.. enough with Darwinian already 
I am sure that you are aware that Darwin theory of evolution is not even widely accepted in the science world?
and.. why can’t I be skeptical in science? Just because someone is a scientist, what he or she says is true?
P.S. you can follow up via e-mail
I am sure that you are aware that Darwin theory of evolution is not even widely accepted in the science world?
and.. why can’t I be skeptical in science? Just because someone is a scientist, what he or she says is true?
P.S. you can follow up via e-mail
2. Stavros
Although I replied via messaging in a long discussion, I feel I should just say a couple of things here.
First it is not Darwinian theory anymore. Darwin had many errors in his postulations and many gaps in knowledge existed there. That said he contributed the theory of natural selection as a means of preservation of the fittest organisms.
Second, science is by definition skeptical about everything and everyone! This is how it works!
And what you mention is the argument from authority and is not within the realms of science but is rather used when someone wants to promote pseudoscientific concepts. If a scientist says something, no matter who he is, he must back up his claims and provide evidence. Otherwise his fall in the scientific community would not be very far
First it is not Darwinian theory anymore. Darwin had many errors in his postulations and many gaps in knowledge existed there. That said he contributed the theory of natural selection as a means of preservation of the fittest organisms.
Second, science is by definition skeptical about everything and everyone! This is how it works!
And what you mention is the argument from authority and is not within the realms of science but is rather used when someone wants to promote pseudoscientific concepts. If a scientist says something, no matter who he is, he must back up his claims and provide evidence. Otherwise his fall in the scientific community would not be very far
3. sciencebitches
“I am sure that you are aware that Darwin theory of evolution is not even widely accepted in the science world? ”
Err, you are kidding right? Even in Texas the latest poll showed that only 2% of scientists have some sympathy for non-evolutionary mechanisms for the divergence of life! And the majority of those still accepted evolution but just left some back door open for the supernatural. And that’s IN TEXAS!
Where do you get your stuff anyway?
Err, you are kidding right? Even in Texas the latest poll showed that only 2% of scientists have some sympathy for non-evolutionary mechanisms for the divergence of life! And the majority of those still accepted evolution but just left some back door open for the supernatural. And that’s IN TEXAS!
Where do you get your stuff anyway?
(Email required for authentication purposes only and will not be published. Please also note that if your comment contains links, profanity, or other sensitive content it might be held for moderation. In that case it will not appear until accepted by the administrator. Please do not post the same comment twice.)