4 ms·
I jumped to the last couple paragraphs of that piece as most of it appears to be issues that do not have proofs within the theory of evolution. Assuming these i
by ReadEvalPost 8y ago
I jumped to the last couple paragraphs of that piece as most of it appears to be issues that do not have proofs within the theory of evolution. Assuming these issues are presented truthfully, they are valid and should be addressed. If they cannot be addressed within the evolutionary framework this does indeed mean an alternate theory is needed.
The author's alternate theory is that "the basic laws of physics have been designed to generate a cosmos adapted for life as it exists on earth." This theory is not falsifiable. It does not provide any insight into why things are the way they are, while evolution provides incredible insight. I see zero reason to believe this work is anything but ideological.
- stcredzero 8y agoIf they cannot be addressed within the evolutionary framework this does indeed mean an alternate theory is needed. All we know is they cannot be addressed yet. Lots of people need to make a good faith effort before an alternate theory is justified. That said, some gaps are always going to remain with any theory. That doesn't necessarily invalidate the entire field.
- nilkn 8y agoIf the great majority of the article presents legitimate issues or gaps in the theory, I don't think the entire article can be dismissed as "anything but ideological" regardless of whether it presents a satisfying alternate theory in the last few paragraphs. I think that conclusion would be more fitting if the examples presented are not legitimate in some way -- perhaps already explained or debunked in other literature or simply incorrect in certain details.