Feed on Posts or Comments 20 June 2019

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 30 Oct 2009 12:33 am

The fact of evolution

Letter in NY Times from Daniel Dennett:

The Fact of Evolution

What is going on at The New York Times? Why is it so bizarrely respectful of those who doubt evolution? In recent years The Times has published three preposterous Op-Ed articles by evolution-doubters (Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Michael J. Behe and Senator Sam Brownback). These no more deserved space in The Times than the opinions of flat-earthers or trance-­channelers. In the wake of Judge John E. Jones III’s decision in the Dover, Pa., case that intelligent design is a religious viewpoint that may not be taught in public schools, one would think The Times would finally recognize that the intelligent design campaign is a hoax and dishonest to the core, and stop giving it respectability in its pages.

3 Responses to “The fact of evolution”

  1. on 01 Nov 2009 at 11:15 am 1.Lou said …

    The answer for Daniel:

    Free speech?

    If we can let Holocaust deniers, 911 conspirators, Katrina conspirators speak, those who question parts of theory of evolution should be welcomed. If your ideas cannot with stand scrutiny then they can’t be very strong.

  2. on 01 Nov 2009 at 8:53 pm 2.LyokoFreaks said …

    Well the idea has been scrutinized, as that is how science works. Evolution is proven to be true and has no counter-evidence against it. Sure, those people you listed have free speech, but that’s not what Daniel is talking about. If you read the post, you would have picked up that Daniel is talking about The Times is giving these history-deniers the time of day. He’s not saying they can’t speak, he’s saying that The Times is pretty strange for publishing such garbage as work done by the likes of Behe and others.

  3. on 02 Nov 2009 at 2:16 am 3.Ben said …

    Freak is right. We actually pay there way to this country so they can speak at the UN and our Universities.

    There are a number of key parts of TOE that have issues and no supporting evidence. To pretend that scientist like Behe do not have viable arguments is to show a lack of knowledge on the subject. He is just one of others that have pointed out the issues and have worked to solve the very complex puzzle.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply