Does Natural Selection Really Work

[Dwayne McDowell]

The reason this cannot be true—even though it is—is because there is no possibility of miracle, because that would violate the immutable laws of natural science. That is what the philosopher David Hume argued, convincingly to many who want it to be true. The mantle of championing Hume's error has been passed down over the years. Richard Dawkins carries it now; before him, Anthony Flew.

Inconveniently for atheists, their former champion Flew abandoned the idea late in life, precisely because of the discovery of what DNA is and does. He decided God really must exist. Dawkins disparagingly attributed his change to senility. Flew suggested Dawkins had become a religious bigot. "[A]t the length the truth will out."

Dwayne: I learned everything I needed to know about Dawkins when he said "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet someone who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)".

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Dwayne: I learned everything I needed to know about Dawkins when he said "It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet someone who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)".

That may be fine for those only interacting with Christians who only interact with other Christians, not so much, those who interact with unbelievers. They need to be far more informed than that.

 

[Dwayne McDowell]

That may be fine for those only interacting with Christians who only interact with other Christians, not so much, those who interact with unbelievers. They need to be far more informed than that.

Dwayne: Agreed. That is why, in part, that I have started a new thread dealing with evolutionism and the laws of science. The first post dealt with Boyles' Law and Cause and Effect. Next will be the Laws of Thermodynamics. I welcome your feedback/criticism.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Dwayne: Agreed. That is why, in part, that I have started a new thread dealing with evolutionism and the laws of science. The first post dealt with Boyles' Law and Cause and Effect. Next will be the Laws of Thermodynamics. I welcome your feedback/criticism.

OK. But the point is that there are reasons he says such things. Knowing the influence can help address root issues--thermodynamics really is not one. Dawkins also speaks in direct contradiction to his parenthetical comment mentioning “wicked.”

He falls squarely into the Einsteinian category of scientist as poor philosopher. None of this would mean much if he weren’t wielding such great influence with his arrogant ignorance. But he is, so it does.

 

[Derf B]

He falls squarely into the Einsteinian category of scientist as poor philosopher.

Or perhaps poor philosopher as poor scientist.