Faizal_Ali
March 22, 2021, 11:21pm
128
T_aquaticus:
" Denton wrote a 400-page book arguing for design in nature which presupposes zero religious belief; all conclusions about design in the book are reached by reasoning from the facts of nature, facts confirmed by modern science."
Those are your claims. Prove it.
@Eddie just may not be up to that task. A while ago I asked some questions about that book, and while Eddie piped in with his usual verbiose insults, he would not answer my rather basic and simple question, saying it was “unscholarly behaviour” on my part to even ask such a thing.
So I wouldn’t assume he understood this book as well as he lets on.
This is based on a discussion started in another thread. Consider the observation documented in the figure below:
[image]
Let’s compare two attempts to explain this observation: The standard current evolutionary account, and that suggested by Intelligent Design proponent Michael Denton.
According to evolutionary theory, the homologous structures depicted above are evidence of common descent, and are accounted for by it. All forelimbs are derived from a common ancestor whose forelimbs showed the basic structure in common between the four examples above, and the differences between the examples are accounted for by subsequent alterations, thru mutations, in the specific forms and proportions of the components of the limbs. That is to say the reason these forelimbs all show the same basic pentadactyl structure is that they were all descended from a pentadactyl ancestor, and developmental constraints (which themselves are merely historically contingent and not functional in origi…
2 Likes