The Great Debate, Part I: Miller & Pennock vs. Dembski & Behe

The scene: the American Museum of Natural History. The topic: "Blind evolution or Intelligent Design". Introduction by Richard Milner. The moderator: Genie Scott. In this first part, Dembski, Pennock, and Miller debate. Event date: 4/23/2002

Category:

Education

Tags:

• NCSE
• evolution
• creationism
• intelligent design
• AMNH
• Genie Scott
• Ken Miller
• Robert Pennock
• William Dembski
• Michael Behe
• blind evolution

[XavierCandiani]

This was the most stupid show i´ve seen. Just a waist of time for everyone and a fuckin hour wasted of my life. You idiots.

[jfly888]

"yes or no, have you stopped beating your wife lately?" lol, trying to pin him on yes & no questions is a set-up

[ScholarVisual]

Dembski makes great points hes just a terrible debater. Its so frustrating. Just answer the mans questions without hesitating every single fucking time. YEESH!!! You makin us look bad.LOL

[odinata]

@circusOFprecision

You certainly are confusing many, many things.

Most likely because you you have only studied them from Creationist sources.

You certainly don't have ANY idea what evolution is.

"Any change in an organism is evolution, according to most biologists now a days."

That's not true--or even close.

Only hours ago you made this false claim:

"Only change that increases complexity and sophistication is considered evolution"

Why not study the subject FIRST?

[circusOFprecision]

@Maxdwolf

I'm not confusing anything, you are the one carelessly using the term. I'm just letting you know that you are causing confusion. Change in organisms over time, not exactly an earth shattering concept. But when you invent a mechanism to explain it, which also attempts to explain all diversity and novelty, you start abusing the definition.

[Maxdwolf]

@circusOFprecision "In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next" Curtis and Barnes from the Talkorigins website. So no, not any change.

More importantly, you are confusing evolution with the theory of evolution by natural selection and common descent. The first is defined. The third is observed. The second is a well established theory.

[circusOFprecision]

Hasbro own science, but they don't want anyone to wreck the game.

[circusOFprecision]

"You can't just pull a piece out..." What, are we playing games now? Is science Janga?

[circusOFprecision]

@Maxdwolf

Any change in an organism is evolution, according to most biologists now a days. You can't argue against and/or falsify that. It's basically meaningless. Evolution has become so ambiguous it no longer says anything about reality.

[LoricaLady]

@Maxdwolf h ave not read your posts. You are on ignore. If you want to go on thinking you are nothing more than a modified ape, who am I to burst your bubble? But since you have insulted me more than once I feel that leaves me with the "excuse" to say what I want to say to you, meant for your benefit. Come out of the matrix. And please don't clutter up my inbox with more of your posts. Thank you and have a great 2012."