June 12, 2008
YOUR ONE SENTENCE GUIDE TO THE SCIENCE WARS:
New front opens on evolution wars (Amy Fagan, 6/12/08, THE WASHINGTON TIMES)
A battle over science education could soon spill into the courts in Louisiana, where looming legislation would allow teachers to bring up scientific criticisms of evolution, global warming and other hot-button topics.
That's an admirably concise statement of what the dispute is over: on the one side are the fundamentalists who can not allow any critical consideration of their faith, and on the other are the more open-minded and skeptical. Posted by Orrin Judd at June 12, 2008 10:25 AM
Hmmm, I notice you haven't mentioned this instance of evolution seen in a laboratory. I await your dismissal of it....
Posted by: PapayaSF at June 12, 2008 1:10 PMWhy would I dismiss a demonstration of Intelligent Design? There's near universal agreement that this is how evolution proceeds.
I'd merely note that even a prize example of evolution fails to produce any significant change to the species. That apparently requires a more intelligent Designer than we.
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2008 3:07 PMIt was a significant change to the species. The inability to metabolise citrate is a defining characteristic of E. coli. It seems like you're saying that even if scientists watch one species of bacteria change into another species, it's just evidence of "intelligent design."
Posted by: PapayaSF at June 12, 2008 5:28 PMDesignists don't argue that biological evolution does not occur. They argue that certain "irreducibly complex" structures did not evolve, and therefore, must have been designed.
Besides, 44000 generations and trillions of organisms? How long is that in primate years? All to bring about the ability to metabolize citrate? Which side of the design/evolution divide is the author on?
Posted by: djs at June 12, 2008 6:32 PMWhen scientists force a species to adapt it is indeed evolution by Intelligent Design. It's what farmers did that Darwin observed and what gave him the idea that it might occur Naturally.
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2008 8:30 PMdjs:
That's the beauty of it, they don't understand their own theory well enough to realize they're refuting it.
Posted by: oj at June 12, 2008 8:31 PMThey aren't "forcing" a species to adapt. They're simply observing it.
Posted by: PapayaSF at June 12, 2008 9:03 PMEven setting Heisenberg aside, where?
Posted by: oj at June 13, 2008 9:59 AMThe bacteria don't know or care they're in a Petri dish in a lab instead of someone's gut. It's not like they're tigers in a zoo, which would change their behavior.
Posted by: PapayaSF at June 13, 2008 7:01 PM