The Verdict on Creationism
onsdag 29 oktober 2008
Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002)"The argument that the literal story of Genesis can qualify as science collapses on three major grounds: the creationists' need to invoke miracles in order to compress the events of the earth's history into the biblical span of a few thousand years; their unwillingness to abandon claims clearly disproved, including the assertion that all fossils are products of Noah's flood; and their reliance upon distortion, misquote, half-quote, and citation out of context to characterize the ideas of their opponents."
Referens:
Stephen Jay Gould, The Verdict on Creationism, The Skeptical Inquirer, 87/88 (186)
Bild:
Katy Chapman
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States license. In short: you are free to distribute and modify the file as long as you attribute its author(s) or licensor(s).
[Länk till detta inlägg] upplagd av Johan Karlsson @
13:43 
Prenumerera på Inlägg [Atom]
Citat:
[ID] is not a scientific argument at all, but a religious one. It might be worth discussing in a class on the history of ideas, in a philosophy class on popular logical fallacies, or in a comparative religion class on origin myths from around the world. But it no more belongs in a biology class than alchemy belongs in a chemistry class, phlogiston in a physics class or the stork theory in a sex education class. In those cases, the demand for equal time for 'both theories' would be ludicrous. Similarly, in a class on 20th-century European history, who would demand equal time for the theory that the Holocaust never happened?Richard Dawkins
Om denna sida:
Evolutionsteori.se drivs av Anders Hesselbom och Johan Karlsson
