by bohm 52 Replies latest jw friends
Darwin on Trial by Phillip Johnson. He destroys the evolutionists, buries them
The only problem is, he's a lawyer, not a biologist.
That's not a problem but an asset, and unless you have read it cover-to-cover you should keep your opinion to yourself.
Jonathan: Personally, the most interesting parts of Dawkins book was not his conclusion (which was predictable), but all the stuff he told about, animals, rocks, fossils - things i didnt even know about! he even made me exited about cabbage and a poor child/ape that was snatched by an eagle millions of years ago! :-).
That said - i dont want to form any pre-consieved ideas about the type of book i want,i know you are a smart person, and i just want the most compelling and truthfull presentation of 'the other side' of the argument.
That's not a problem but an asset, and unless you have read it cover-to-cover you should keep your opinion to yourself.
Wow.
I didn't agree with much of it, but I thought Denton (Evolution A Theory In Crises) was one of the better criticisms of evolutionary theory I've read.
Denton is at least scientifically literate even if he does display a predilection for unsound argument.
What I find interesting is that the order that the creation of life is mentioned in genesis is in general agreement with the order that fossils have shown and evolution predicts.
Are you sure about that? Looks all out of whack to me.
Bible order:
Real order:
unless you have read it cover-to-cover you should keep your opinion to yourself. - JO DO
Yeah wow!
Once you've read a few books by religiously motivated non-biologists criticising something they don't properly understand you've read them all. Life is not long enough to read the ramblings of every nutter with an opinion.
Michael Behe's book has been thoroughly refuted. It's main claims (irreducible complexity, ID, bacterial flagellum, blood clotting cascade etc) were exposed in court in the Dover trial by real scientists, some of whom were also religious by the way
The topic is the BEST book, not if we think it is GOOD!
update: Okay the topic is actually 'Good books'. Time to go to bed... :-D.
"Are you sure about that? Looks all out of whack to me."
No i agree that it's out of whack because sun/stars is out of order with the rest. Obviously plants can't perform photosynthesis without the sun, and I don't agree with the literal view of genesis in any way what-so-ever.
I just find it interesting that (taking out the sun/stars part) the order is pretty close to what evolution predicts and has been verified by evidence. It's probably a coincidence and just an observation from my reading of genesis. I look at it from the same context as the Mayans/Celtics and other civilizations having an uncanny understanding of the motion of stars and galaxies without the benefit of modern technology.
If you look at my previous posts, I have argued against creationism and ID. If I had to classify myself, I'm agnostic border-line atheist, so I definately don't want my post to come across as support of ID/creationism.
It never fails that someone cites fiction the Bible as "proof" against evolution.
