Darwinist ignorance and confusion (Introduction)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Wednesday, June 09, 2010, 23:15 (5260 days ago) @ David Turell

This article by Elliott Sober mentions human fetus gill slits twice. He still believes Haeckel!
> 
> http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/06/15/0901109106.abstract 
> 
> With full professors like this touting Darwin, what can really be accepted as proper thinking about Darwin's theory? The full article is available for free-I think its proper to put this paper in its perspective: It's a philosopher providing a critical analysis of an idea that has been modified heavily since its inception. I question the value of such a textual analysis. -
Natural selection--despite its flaws--is still the most usable theory of evolution; Science is, was, and will always be about the most usable explanations. -Furthermore, it should be clear that the Summit you've been touting for so long is a meeting point for biologists to discuss the current research and clarify what's right and wrong about current study: where you read fault I see the system working as it should, within the normal confines of how memes evolve over time. Your summit might be the beginning of a new Paradigm Shift in biology. Alas, not one that will give anyone who values objective evidence (as their primary epistemology) the fuel they need in the debate over design.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"