Stephen C. Meyer | The Ben Shapiro Show Sunday

Lol none of those follow from ID. Because nothing does. Nothing but a bunch of postdictions. @sfmatheson didn’t this prediction list come up at BIOLA back in the day?

1 Like

Edgar, not a single one of those is empirical. That’s pseudoscience.

3 Likes

list 10 empirical testable predictions for macroevolution, namely the hypothesis that all living forms ‘‘evolved’’ from a single-celled organism to all living organism as we see today via undirected processes such as natural selection and random mutation. If you list 10 of them, i will see what you mean by empirical predictions, i will do the same for ID

Let’s see what actually happens after this interview. I suspect that the topics discussed will not reach millions of listeners that have not heard this all before. Perhaps it will renew some vigor among those that already accept ID, but I doubt there will be a large number of “converts” as an outcome.

1 Like

Just after interview Darwin’s Doubt on the Amazon ranks #592 in overall Best Sellers. Yesterday, it was something 762, at least I see Darwin’s Doubt is doing well after the interview

If a book moving from #762 to #592 on a Best Seller list constitutes a “game-changer”, then you haven’t set the bar very high.

4 Likes

no, i said what we can observe empirically in the last 24 hours, i did not say it was the goal

And you have no evidence that these people who are buying the book didn’t already accept some type of ID (you can accept ID without having read every ID book. I haven’t read every evo book and I accept evo) or creationism. This is absolutely meaningless unless you can show these people who have bought the book accepted evolutionary theory.

2 Likes

He didn’t say you did…

1 Like

for evolutionary theory it is taught in schools and universities without critical look, so, most people accept it becase there are ‘‘smart guys’’ who know better than me, that is why they decided to teach me evolutionary theory without showing the weakness of the theory, why i have to doubt, the ‘‘smart guys’’ are always ‘‘honest’’ towards me, if there were any weakness in the darwinian story, they would tell me, is not it?

No need to read additional books to acccept evolutiionary theory

I’ll take incoherent mess for 500, Alex. Your bias and dogmatic position on ID prevents you from contributing anything meaningful or intelligent. You routinely say absolutely silly things. I won’t be conversing with you any longer

1 Like

in case we are from different cultures, which means, my words could mean different things to you,
you could ask for clarification but not insulting personally.

I am thankful to be the most unbiased forum with pretended unbiased participants

Maybe, I don’t recall. The list is a joke, as is most of this thread.

3 Likes

It pains me to say this but I heard virtually this identical sentence in an online video by a flat-earth proponent. (I’m not trying to denigrate or mock “ID theory” advocates. I’m simply observing that the arguments made in the above sentence are used by a lot of contrarians who claim that their opponents in the academy are naive, biased, and unfairly conspiring to ignore important research.)

Of course they do. When a person is not trained and experienced in a given academic field or technical topic, that person naturally relies upon the Ph.D. experts who are well qualified to address that topic. Thus, I will reword what you said in order to apply your logic to other academic topics taught in schools and universities:

(1) For the Germ Theory of Disease, it is taught in schools and universities without critical look, so, most people accept it because there are ‘‘smart guys’’ who know better than me, …

(2) For Differential Calculus, it is taught in schools and universities without critical look, so, most people accept it because there are ‘‘smart guys’’ who know better than me, …

(3) For the Theory of ATP Production Via Photosynthesis, it is taught in schools and universities without critical look, so, most people accept it because there are ‘‘smart guys’’ who know better than me, …

(4) For the Heliocentric Model of our solar system, it is taught in schools and universities without critical look, so, most people accept it because there are ‘‘smart guys’’ who know better than me, …

Looking to qualified experts to shape our understanding of the world is a wise habit. I can even cite Bible passages in support of that practice.

7 Likes

except the fact, that the mechanism for Darwinian evolution to account all complexity and diversity of life is being questioned in peer-reviewed literature, I am NOt interested what Ph.D. experts say, but rather what he published.

I recommend that you investigate how authors and publishers can hire “book ranking consultants” who can develop strategies to create temporary improvements in book rankings at a particular time—for a price. Such manipulations aren’t as easy as they were a few years ago but such a modest bump in Amazon ranking is not that difficult to achieve.

Meanwhile, I find it interesting that at present Darwin’s Doubt is ranked #1 in RELIGIOUS BOOKS on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/468234/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_books_2_1_last

I wonder what Stephen Meyer thinks about Amazon and the world’s booksellers classifying Darwin’s Doubt in the “religious book” category. As the #1 religious book, it bested Rose Book of Bible Charts, Maps, and Time Lines.

2 Likes

“Darwinian evolution” hasn’t been the scientific consensus for 70 years or so. Why do ID-Creationists like Meyer and Behe waste science’s time by still attacking it?

You are wrong, Darwin’s Doubt is ranked #1 in Biology* https://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/684289011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_books_1_1_last

I do not think science should be settled by consensus

1 Like

The point flew so far over your head it left contrails. :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like