Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Lisa · 01-17-2003, 04:12 PM

Michael Denton's book, "Evolution, A Theory in Crisis" was one of the best books I have read in a while. To call Darwinian evolution, "the great cosmogenic myth of the 20th century" was brilliant. There aren't missing links. They just dont exist because nothing evolved in the sense of macroevolution............Lisa

hadelerl@castleberryisd.net

Jobar · 01-17-2003, 05:27 PM

There aren't missing links. They just dont exist because nothing evolved in the sense of macroevolution

Lisa, I think you are about to be rained upon by a cloud of anvils.

But, I won't drop the first one; I want to know why it is that your post count seems stuck on zero. It may be some problem the vB experts should check out.

KnightWhoSaysNi · 01-17-2003, 06:10 PM

Hi Lisa,

Are you familiar with Denton's new book, Nature's Destiny? You might find these quotes interesting:

Quote:

It is important to emphasize at the outset that the argument presented here is entirely consistent with the basic naturalistic assumption of modern science--that the cosmos is a seamless unity which can be comprehended in its entirety by human reason and in which all phenomena, including life and evolution and the origin of man, are ultimately explicable in terms of natural processes. This is an assumption which is entirely opposed to that of the so-called "special creationist school." According to special creationism, living organisms are not natural forms, whose origin and design were built into the laws of nature from the beginning, but rather contingent forms analogous in essence to human artifacts, the result of a series of supernatural acts, involving God's direct intervention in the course of nature, each of which involved the suspension of natural law. Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the organic world--that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms, waterfalls, or galaxies.

In large measure, therefore, the teleological argument presented here and the special creationist worldview are mutually exclusive accounts of the world. In the last analysis, evidence for one is evidence against the other. Put simply, the more convincing is the evidence for believing that the world is prefabricated to the end of life, that the design is built into the laws of nature, the less credible becomes the special creationist worldview.

Though Denton tries to present a teleological argument, he still accepts evolution.

As for the claim that 'missing links' don't exist, I assume that you're referring to intermediate/transitional forms. If they don't exist, then perhaps you can explain why we find these things in the fossil record.

If you go to the above link, you'll see that intermediate forms have been found such as reptiles to birds, reptiles to mammals, apes to humans, and the land dwelling ancestors of whales.

tgamble · 01-17-2003, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lisa
Michael Denton's book, "Evolution, A Theory in Crisis" was one of the best books I have read in a while. To call Darwinian evolution, "the great cosmogenic myth of the 20th century" was brilliant. There aren't missing links. They just dont exist because nothing evolved in the sense of macroevolution............Lisa
hadelerl@castleberryisd.net

The Fossil Record
Including Transitional Fossils
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/fossil_record.htm

Whale Evolution
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/whale_evolution.htm

Missing the Missing Links: A Critical Look at Creationist Paleontology
http://members.aol.com/ps418/tran.htm

The Fossil Record: Evolution or "Scientific Creation"
Clifford A. Cuffey
http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_00.htm

Bubba · 01-17-2003, 07:42 PM

Welcome to Infidels lisa. I would invite you to look at the links tgamble has kindly provided for you. I myself used to be a Hugh Ross style creationist but I now believe in thiestic evolution.

You might also find Nature's Destiny to be enjoyable. It is a very well written and readable book.

Chris

-DM- · 01-18-2003, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jobar
But, I won't drop the first one; I want to know why it is that your post count seems stuck on zero. It may be some problem the vB experts should check out.

Perhaps because the e-mail address Lisa supplied turned out to be bogus and her user record has been set aside in the "waiting confirmation" queue.

-Don-

ps418 · 01-18-2003, 09:54 AM

There was an old thread discussing Denton's comments on Special Creation from the book "Darwinism Defeated." Basically, he thinks special creation is laughably wrong, and cites some interesting genetic evidence to that effect.

I can't find this thread, or any old threads, using the search function. Is this thread gone forever? Or can I still find it somewhere?

Patrick

ps418 · 01-18-2003, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lisa
There aren't missing links. They just dont exist because nothing evolved in the sense of macroevolution............Lisa

Well perhaps you could share with us the operational definition of "missing link" that you are assuming, and why it does not apply to the following examples of morphological intermediates between earlier and later taxa?

Feathered dinos and early birds

Fish to Amphibian Transition Documented

Fossil homonids Origin of Whales and the Power of Independent Evidence

Patrick

Jobar · 01-18-2003, 06:16 PM

DM:
"[T]he e-mail address Lisa supplied turned out to be bogus and her user record has been set aside in the "waiting confirmation" queue. "

Oh darn. I had hoped that some new feature of vB allowed us to indicate IQs of new trolls.

Albion · 01-18-2003, 11:18 PM

Well, if it's any help, here's the last bit of Michael Denton's xcontribution to "Darwinism Defeated?" - I vaguely remember posting this before, but I can't find it in a search either. The book was published in 1999.

"In conclusion, I agree with [Phillip] Johnson that the Darwinian model is an inadequate explanation for how evolution occurred. And I think he is right to attack the exaggerated claims of certain Darwinian theorists who extend Darwinian explanations to include all aspects of human nature and behaviour. Where he does this I applaud his efforts. I also agree with him that the living organisms exhibit design. However I am not aware of any convincing arguments put forward by Johnson to show that this design necessitates special creation. I am also unaware of any serious systematic attempt by Johnson to show how the facts of biology, such as those of geographical distribution discussed above, can be accounted for more plausibly in creationist than evolutionary terms. Until he does this, academic biology will not take his antievolutionism seriously.
In his advocacy of special creationism I believe Johnson is merely the latest in a succession of vigorous creationist advocates who have been very influential within conservative Christian circles, particularly in the United States, during the twentieth century. None of these advocates, however, has had any lasting influence among academic biologists. This is not because science is biased in favour of philosophical naturalism but because the special creationist model is not supported by the facts and is incapable of providing a more plausible explanation for the pattern of life's diversity in time and space than its evolutionary competitor. The reason why no current member of the US National Academy of Science is a special creationist is because of the facts, the same facts that in the nineteenth century convinced Darwin and Wallace and all the leading Christian biologists, including Joseph Hooker, Asa Gray, and Charles Lyell, of the reality of descent with moidification

01-17-2003, 04:12 PM	#1
Lisa New Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Fort Worth Posts: 3	Michael Denton Michael Denton's book, "Evolution, A Theory in Crisis" was one of the best books I have read in a while. To call Darwinian evolution, "the great cosmogenic myth of the 20th century" was brilliant. There aren't missing links. They just dont exist because nothing evolved in the sense of macroevolution............Lisa hadelerl@castleberryisd.net

01-17-2003, 07:42 PM	#5
Bubba Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Orient, OH USA Posts: 1,501	Welcome to Infidels Lisa Welcome to Infidels lisa. I would invite you to look at the links tgamble has kindly provided for you. I myself used to be a Hugh Ross style creationist but I now believe in thiestic evolution. You might also find Nature's Destiny to be enjoyable. It is a very well written and readable book. Chris

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-17-2003, 05:27 PM	#2
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	There aren't missing links. They just dont exist because nothing evolved in the sense of macroevolution Lisa, I think you are about to be rained upon by a cloud of anvils. But, I won't drop the first one; I want to know why it is that your post count seems stuck on zero. It may be some problem the vB experts should check out.

01-18-2003, 09:54 AM	#7
ps418 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Louisville, KY, USA Posts: 1,840	There was an old thread discussing Denton's comments on Special Creation from the book "Darwinism Defeated." Basically, he thinks special creation is laughably wrong, and cites some interesting genetic evidence to that effect. I can't find this thread, or any old threads, using the search function. Is this thread gone forever? Or can I still find it somewhere? Patrick

01-18-2003, 06:16 PM	#9
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	DM: "[T]he e-mail address Lisa supplied turned out to be bogus and her user record has been set aside in the "waiting confirmation" queue. " Oh darn. I had hoped that some new feature of vB allowed us to indicate IQs of new trolls.

01-18-2003, 11:18 PM	#10
Albion Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com Posts: 2,829	Well, if it's any help, here's the last bit of Michael Denton's xcontribution to "Darwinism Defeated?" - I vaguely remember posting this before, but I can't find it in a search either. The book was published in 1999. "In conclusion, I agree with [Phillip] Johnson that the Darwinian model is an inadequate explanation for how evolution occurred. And I think he is right to attack the exaggerated claims of certain Darwinian theorists who extend Darwinian explanations to include all aspects of human nature and behaviour. Where he does this I applaud his efforts. I also agree with him that the living organisms exhibit design. However I am not aware of any convincing arguments put forward by Johnson to show that this design necessitates special creation. I am also unaware of any serious systematic attempt by Johnson to show how the facts of biology, such as those of geographical distribution discussed above, can be accounted for more plausibly in creationist than evolutionary terms. Until he does this, academic biology will not take his antievolutionism seriously. In his advocacy of special creationism I believe Johnson is merely the latest in a succession of vigorous creationist advocates who have been very influential within conservative Christian circles, particularly in the United States, during the twentieth century. None of these advocates, however, has had any lasting influence among academic biologists. This is not because science is biased in favour of philosophical naturalism but because the special creationist model is not supported by the facts and is incapable of providing a more plausible explanation for the pattern of life's diversity in time and space than its evolutionary competitor. The reason why no current member of the US National Academy of Science is a special creationist is because of the facts, the same facts that in the nineteenth century convinced Darwin and Wallace and all the leading Christian biologists, including Joseph Hooker, Asa Gray, and Charles Lyell, of the reality of descent with moidification

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.