Design or Non-Design, finally we know, Darwin's Doubt

by QC 371 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  QC

  If you want to read the definitive explanation on fossils and how life arrived it’s covered in Darwin’s Doubt, by S.C. Meyer.

  This is a game changer.

  The bomb!

  DARWIN’S DOUBT

  THE EXPLOSIVE ORIGIN OF ANIMAL LIFE AND

  THE CASE FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN

  • STEPHEN C. MEYER

  BLURBS

  
  

  Dr. Meyer makes it clear that these well-documented facts of paleontology pose a serious challenge to Darwin’s theory, the view that has held sway in biology (and well beyond) for nearly 150 years. The issue on the table is not now, nor has it ever been, the fact of evolution (change over time); the issue has always been the mechanism of evolution – is it blind and undirected or is it under the control of an intelligence that had a goal in mind? That’s the nub of the question, and in Darwin’s Doubt, Stephen Meyer has masterfully laid out one of the most compelling lines of evidence for the latter. -William S. Harris
  PhD, Professor, Sanford School of Medicine, University of South Dakota

  
  

  Stephen Meyer’s new book Darwin’s Doubt represents an opportunity for bridge-building, rather than dismissive polarization — bridges across cultural divides in great need of professional, respectful dialog — and bridges to span evolutionary gaps. -Dr. George Church
  Professor of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, and author of Regenesis

  Darwin’s Doubt is an intriguing exploration of one of the most remarkable periods in the evolutionary history of life—the rapid efflorescence of complex body plans written in the fossils of the Burgess Shale . . . No matter what convictions one holds about evolution, Darwinism, or intelligent design, Darwin’s Doubt is a book that should be read, engaged, and discussed. -Dr. Scott Turner
  Professor of Biology, State University of New York, author of The Tinkerer’s Accomplice: How Design Emerges from Life Itself

  Stephen Meyer elegantly explains why the sudden appearance of animal forms in the Cambrian period gave Darwin pause. He also demonstrates, based on cutting-edge molecular biology, why explaining the origin of animals is now not just a problem of missing fossils, but an even greater engineering problem at the molecular level. With mathematical precision, he shows why the neo-Darwinian mechanism cannot produce the genetic information and novel proteins—or systems for regulating their expression—that are required to build new animals.

  An excellent book and a must read for anyone who wants to gain understanding of the very real—though often unreported—scientific challenges facing neo-Darwinism. -Dr. Russell Carlson
  Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Director of the Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, University of Georgia

  Darwin’s Doubt is by far the most up-to-date, accurate, and comprehensive review of the evidence from all relevant scientific fields that I have encountered in more than forty years of studying the Cambrian explosion. An engaging investigation of the origin of animal life and a compelling case for intelligent design. Dr. Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig
  Senior Scientist Emeritus (Biologist) at the Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany

  
  

  It is hard for us paleontologists, steeped as we are in a tradition of Darwinian analysis, to admit that neo-Darwinian explanations for the Cambrian explosion have failed miserably. New data acquired in recent years, instead of solving Darwin’s dilemma, have rather made it worse. Meyer describes the dimensions of the problem with clarity and precision. His book is a game changer for the study of evolution and points us in the right direction as we seek a new theory for the origin of animals.
  -Dr. Mark McMenamin
  Paleontologist at Mt. Holyoke College and author of The Emergence of Animals

  Darwin’s Doubt is another excellent book by Stephen Meyer. I particularly like his refutation of the concept of self-assembly of biological systems. The book explains the difference between specified complexity and order and shows that natural forces cannot generate the kind of complexity we see in living systems. I know from my personal work in the Systems Centre at Bristol University that complex systems do not create themselves but require an intelligent designer. Stephen Meyer has clearly listened to the arguments of those who are sceptical about intelligent design and has addressed them thoroughly. It is really important that Darwinists read this book carefully and give a response. -Professor Stuart Burgess
  Professor of Design and Nature, Head of Mechanical Engineering at Bristol University

  I spend my life reading science books. I’ve ready many hundreds of them over the years, and in my judgment Darwin’s Doubt is the best science book ever written. It is a magnificent work, a true masterpiece that will be read for hundreds of years.

  -George Gilder
  Writer, techno-utopian economist, and New York Times bestselling author

  Meyer writes beautifully. He marshals complex information as well as any writer I’ve read . . . This book—and his body of work—challenges scientism with real science and excites in me the hope that the origins-of-life debate will soon be largely free of the ideology that has long colored it . . . a wonderful, most compelling read. -Dean Koontz
  New York Times bestselling author
• 

  bohm

  The book gets picked apart at Pandas Thumb:

  http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2013/06/meyers-hopeless-2.html
• 

  cantleave

  I love the way all these quotes were created before the book was even published!

  Give it Intelligent Design Idiots, get them to review it and then make headlines. Great marketing, but intellectually dishonest.
• 

  The Scotsman

  Looks interesting - think I will order this book, thanks for bringing it to our attention.
• 

  snare&racket

  You don't seem to understand, that scientists attempting to piece to together the mass of evidence and not getting it right first time means that GENESIS is right. You know how you see tv footage from one generation ago, where balck people were beaten, hosed, segregated, arrested... And it is painful to watch, it is Embarassing. The burning crosses, the white hoods. What about imprisoning GAllileo for his science? What about teaching for centuries that rainbows are a message from god about rain? What about teaching donkeys talked? What about teaching that all the animals in the world were put in a boat! What about teaching life and the earth survived without rain! What about teaching the earth is 6000 -10,000 years old... What about teaching man was made first and therefore dominant, woman second, living in a magical garden until they ate an apple, encouraged by a talking snake...

  shall I carry on.....

  and people dare to point at the yet perfected explanations of minute rock formation over millions of years with a scientific method that is only a couple of hundred of years old, with decent technology only becoming available in OUR lifetime.....

  pre-evaluate the evidence, your bias and the probability of who will be looked back on in a hundred years time with embarrassment, the people following the evidence or the people unmovable because if a scroll from the desert, stories from bronze aged shepherds, written by their power hungry priests, edited by roman authority figures.....

  Or believe everything anyone tells you that makes you feel all gooey inside.....SUUUUREEE... Dinosaurs lived 6000years ago with Adam, the science of them living for 150 million years, dying 60 million years ago is an error. If we dig down in the earth, it is just a coincidence that the deeper you go the more simple life gets and we can watch a process in our lifetime that happens to explain how they could have changed over s long time.....but no the scrolls are right!!!!

  Anyone can write a book, anyone can claim anything. If they show contrary evidence to blast evolution apart....then great. But they don't, they look for anomalies and yet to be explained evidence. If you KNEW the size of the evidence pile for evolution, you would realise how silly this is. You would also be angry with Christian medical doctors writing papers on rock formations.... Only to be torn apart within ours by REAL experts. But guess who that paper was good enough for?,....... Bias is a dangerous thing, we all have it. Be honest, are they keeping it in check? Are you?

  Dont trust ANYONE look at the evidence yourself...

  p.s. Darwin was 150 years ago and got a lot wrong, but his idea is the best suggestion for ALLLLLLL of the evidence we so far have accumilated. Try asking a Christian to explain away allllllllll the evidence FOR evolution. They won't even discuss it, they don't even know it, they haven't even seen it. All they will discuss is anomalies that satisfy their desicions to ignore the evidence for evolution. That's up to them. But don't just copy them... Look and decide for yourself, pro evolution people too.
• 

  smiddy

  snare&racket

  smiddy
• 

  ÁrbolesdeArabia

  Snare and Racket, when we compare the volume of killings done in the 20th Century by men who repudiated their religious upbringing in favor of a Atheist World view, I don't feel that warm and fuzzy feelings you are getting from it.

  Stalin rejected his Orthodox upbringings in favor of Atheism and Mao his Buddism and Hitler used religious rhetoric to get the crowd to vote for him and later attacked the Christian concept of "compassion, equality, empathy" as weakness using Nietzsche's philosophies (not Christian, atheist) and who did Hitler surround himself around? Hitler picked out the most wicked men who hated religion, attacked the Church and Christianty as a weakness to Nazi Germany, his Atheist A-list were Joseph Goebbels, Heydrich and Bormann.

  How many people did these wonderful men kill while preaching "God is Dead!"? The amount of humans killed by these men exceed far more than the Church is suppose to have killed, in the 20th century, it's estimated over 100,000,000 were killed by Atheist rulers. This number is exponetially higher than anything the Catholic or Protestant Church ever did. What enlightment did the new Atheist rulers bring to their countries with their ability to deny morality and question if anything is really wrong?

  Why should anyone who is religious want to listen to the rich history of killing factories developed by Atheist rulers who lived by the creed "Morality is questionable", Christian qualities like "compassion, equality, love your neighbor, empathy, self-sacrificing love" were signs of weakness in favor of the philospher who went insane and preached "Superman" Nietzche's philosphy of stomping the weak? Those men eliminated morality and did not fear a judgement, look how well that went for their people. The greatest killing mahcines in history were countries who have a that strong anti-Christian and anti-moral world-view.

  You posted many "appeals to emotion" arguments so I guess that open's the thread for it. Atheism had it's chance to demonstrate how superior it was during the 20th century, and it turned out to be the greatest killer of humans without regard for their being, their education, it was quite indiscriminate at killing anyone for any reason they deemed good! The rich culture of exquiste tortures and heritage of a Hundred Million brutal killings, rapes and bludgeoning deaths is the price to pay for having no morals.

  I would rather believe in a "taking snake", "talking donkey" and a "Global food" than believe humans are nothing more than "Soil and Green".

  Wall Street and the Business Community has been exposed to the toxic thoughts that morality is subjective, so why not steal from anyone you can? The teachers in those schools did not focus on morals, ethics (if there is not God, why not steal and take from the weakest?) and qualities that taught them to "Love your fellow as yourself!". Really, is anything truly bad or wicked with a worldview where you believe you have nothing to answer for when you die?
• 

  BobFlanagan007

  @ ÁrbolesdeArabia - Where to start?

  So you are saying that Stalin and Mao's expressed atheism was the reason for their actions rather than the fact they were simply evil men?

  Hitler was an atheist? He was a Christian who towards the end of his life may have shifted to a deistic world view. He actually on occasion spoke up in defence of the Christian faith and was known to compare himself to Jesus.

  I could ask you why any atheist would want to hear about all the millions of people who have died over the centuries at the hands of the Christian church? But you know what? Unlike you I do not tar all Christians with the same brush. Sure I believe they are deluded and I don't understand why how they could believe in something so obviously untrue but on the whole they are good people and if they want to waste their life waiting for an afterlife that will never come that is their choice not mine. For example you choose to believe in the Biblical Great Flood despite it being proven without doubt never to have happened and said story being a stock myth from every pre-Christian Babylonian religion (if their version is untrue then how comes the Christian variation is?)

  Stocks and shares and the corporate business model existed centuries before public expression of atheism became socialy acceptable so I fail to see what point you are making by mentioning them.

  You ask "if there is no God why not steal and take from the weakest?" I answer because in the vast majority of cases it is wrong to take something that is not yours certainly if that person has greater need for it than yourself.

  I know that when I die I will not have to answer to any sort of supernatural deity but that in no way gives me any excuse to needlessly steal or lie or cheat or kill, and how dare you imply that immorality is the default atheist mindset.
• 

  Captain Obvious

  Arboles; You aren't really making that argument, are you? How about a look at history? Did you forget the inquisition? The reformation? Holy wars? The RCC alone is guilty of HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of murders.

  You can't seriously be so ignorant. Christianity is responsible for holding humanity back for close to 100 years. Think where we would be without Christianity's cancerous attitudes. Go read a book.
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  " the definitive explanation on... how life arrived "

  Like I stated in the other thread, unless this book explains how an intelligent designer came into existance from nothing, this book doesn't answer any question about how life began.

  Proving the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing, never-speaking intelligent FSM involves much more than trying to cast doubt on Darwin.