Sep 062005
 

Darwinian is bankrupt to provide detail explanation for their fairytale leaving them to resort to denial and misleading rhetoric against ID. They have ignored the scientific argument from Stephen Meyer and Marcus Ross. Their argument centers on the comparison of top-down (ID/disparity precedes diversity) vs. bottom-up (Darwinian). The Cambrian Explosion where the major phyla (disparity) precedes the subphyla (diversity).

If you compare the 2 theories/explanations for the diversity of life, there is no empirical direct mechanism to support both theories. In the study of the origins of species we are dealing with historical science. In dealing with any historical science we need to collect the data and with open mind find the best explanation that fits that data and not some preconceived notion of how the data should fit. In this sense Darwinian evolution demands a bottom-up approach to fit this theory. The major forms must be preceded by the components that make up that form. It is what Dawkins calls the cumulative gradual selection. Darwinism gradualism requires a step by small incremental step that adds up to, for example the development of an eye.

It has been beyond credulity that Darwinists have been able to pull the wool over the eyes of so many for so long.