With about 70 billion stars and as many as 100 million life forms (at least here on Earth), the universe is a stunningly complex place. Did all of this matter evolve independently, or was it guided by a larger force – as proponents of intelligent design believe? With the debate raging in living rooms, classrooms and courtrooms, the stakes are high when it comes to determining intelligent design’s merit.
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
5
11
15
13
11
6
10
8
6
6
9
7
6
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Hypocrisy: NCSE Uses Religious Arguments—to Advocate for Evolution!
Fascinating self deception
--Casey
Late last night I posted my final rebuttals to the NCSE on OpposingViews.com. This makes 12 total rebuttals for the pro-ID side and zero for the anti-ID side (though Americans United did post a sur-rebuttal tellingly titled “You Lost the Case -- Get Over It”).
---
Over 375 comments, mostly showing the vacuity of ID, the NCSE need not respond. Casey's description of the NCSE's position is as usual full of empty accusations and yet fail to address the simple fact that
ID is scientifically vacuous.
Casey's response shows the full extent of the self deception and appeal to fallacies.
Sad really but par for the course.
Nuff said
- PvM
September 18, 2008 9:39PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
And did anyone notice
Casey relies on the fallacy that undermining evolution somehow provides merit to ID. Funny that he decided not to address the lack of merit of ID.
Come to think of it, perhaps understandable, as a lawyer, what else is left to do but to attempt to impugn the witnesses.
It did not work during Dover v Kitzmiller where Casey and the DI were outclassed by the NCSE and the many witnesses, and it will not work here.
It should be clear to all now that ID is unable to defend itself against even the simplest observations that ID has remained scientifically vacuous. I bet that is by design.
- PvM
September 18, 2008 9:43PM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.