1 post • joined 6 May 2007
"evolution" is not an "explanation"
Many of those who have responded to Clive's comments have displayed an amazing degree of blind faith in naturalistic evolution (or Darwinism for short). The design inference that this newly upgraded level of specified complexity discovered in vertebrate eyes bolsters cannot be so easily dismissed with words like " a little thing called evolution" or appeals to "Natural Selection" devoid of evidence. To claim that vertebrates who did not have this feature died out over millions of years does nothing to prove that vertabrates without these cells ever existed. This is merely an assumption with no supporting evidence.
Such, it would seem, is the course of those who mock a valid design inference as "religious". They deplore Intelligent Design, claiming that it is a faith commitment, and all the while, they rest their case on the undemonsrated creative power of natural selection acting on random varriation like gene mutations. Now that is blind faith and as much a dogma as any religious doctrine.
- One HUNDRED FAMOUS LADIES exposed NUDE online
- Twitter: La la la, we have not heard of any NUDE JLaw, Upton SELFIES
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Apple to devs: NO slurping users' HEALTH for sale to Dark Powers
- Is that a 64-bit ARM Warrior in your pocket? No, it's MIPS64