Puck reviews "Taking Leave of Darwin"

Actually, the other review he was referring to was a five-star, still there, titled “Great book on an evolving subject.” Go figure. I think he was feeling intellectually superior and that he had grasped the real meaning of the book.

Unfortunately, that “real meaning,” if indeed the book has a coherent meaning (which I do doubt), had no bearing on the validity of evolutionary theory. But that’s the case so often with these pseudo-intellectual types within creationism: they think that thinking about other people’s thinking is more important than thinking about the things other people were thinking about. Who cares if Darwin was inspired by Lucretius (hint: he wasn’t)? Seriously, how could that ever matter to anyone other than someone who was charting how ideas got around as opposed to figuring out which ones had the power to stay around because they explain the evidence better than their alternatives do? But, no. If the author thinks Darwin’s ideas can be compared to those Roman poets whom the author dislikes, well, that’s the end for evolutionary theory. All the scientists can just shut down their labs and stop looking into that, because, you know, Lucretius.


The end for atomic physics as well, as Lucretius contributed to pagan atomist philosophy. Have you ever seen an atom? Just asking.


This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.