They’re exhibiting either misguided confidence or absolute desperation. Who? You know who — the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute‘s creationist public relations and lobbying operation, the Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids, a/k/a the cdesign proponentsists).
You can decide which it is. They’ve just posted What Are the Top Ten Problems with Darwinian Evolution? It’s by Casey Luskin, our favorite creationist. He’s a Curmudgeon fellow and a follower of the Knights of Uranus. Casey says, with bold font added by us and his links omitted:
A few months back I gave my top three criticisms of Darwinian evolution that I think should be taught in public schools.
Yes, and we wrote about it here: Casey’s Big Three Evolution Flaws. It’s always interesting when Casey tries to summarize the Discoveroids’ case, as it so neatly illustrates how empty their cupboard really is.
From time to time, your Curmudgeon likes to respond in kind, by summarizing the Discoveroids’ positions. This is useful to demonstrate the utter emptiness of their “theory” of intelligent design, the nothingness of their case against evolution, and the illogic of their entire enterprise. For example, see Their Latest Fallacy (a list of the clunkers that sustain the Discoveroids), and also Intelligent Designer or Zeus? (Casey’s so-called “positive case” for the magic designer), and also The Mechanism of Intelligent Design (Casey asks: Why wouldn’t the designer have a mechanism?), and also Are They Thinking At All? (more on the missing “positive case” for intelligent design), and also Discovery Institute Gives Us Their Best Argument (the 2nd law of thermodynamics).
Anyway, let’s take a look at Casey’s “Top Ten” problems with evolution. We won’t discuss them all — that would be much too tedious. We’ll just give you a few examples, and then leave it to you to examine the rest. Here we go, starting with number one:
Lack of a viable mechanism for producing high levels of complex and specified information.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Evolution has no mechanism? A couple of paragraphs ago we gave you a link to Casey’s mechanism for intelligent design. Take your pick, dear reader. Okay, here’s number two:
The failure of the fossil record to provide support for Darwinian evolution.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Impressed? Oh, all right, we’ll link yet again to Wikipedia’s list of transitional fossils. Wait ’til you see Casey’s number three:
The failure of molecular biology to provide evidence for a grand “tree of life.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! If you haven’t looked lately, check out the Tree of Life Web Project. What would an arrangement of the designer’s product line look like — a pile of stuff in the regional warehouse for Wal-Mart?
Okay, dear reader. Those were Casey’s best. It’s up to you to check out the rest of his woeful list. He concludes his post with this:
Of course, even these “top ten” still just scratch the surface. What would you add?
What would we add? How about a warning label at the start of that list? This one from Dante seems appropriate: Abandon hope all ye who enter here!
Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.