You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #4: Donald Prothero's review is pure gold [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-07-09 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Donald Prothero's review is pure gold
Creationist garbage by someone with no relevant professional training, November 30, 2009
By Donald Prothero
I concur with the comments by the other 1-star reviewers, and would like to point out that Meyer has NO degree in biology, biochemistry or molecular biology--and it shows. His arguments are full of holes, and his command of facts is not even worthy of a frosh biology student. He does NO research in molecular biology, does not know anything about the actual data or how it was collected, and apparently doesn't even understand the primary literature when he bothers to read it. Likewise, his arguments about the "Cambrian explosion" are pure garbage. He has NO degree in paleontology, has never traveled to the key outcrops or collected the fossils, and wouldn't know one fossil from another if he had. There is no longer any "Cambrian explosion," just a Cambrian "slow fuse," from the earliest fossils of the major invertebrate phyla in Doushantuo, China, 600 m.y. ago, to the soft-bodied but large Ediacarans, to the earliest Cambrian "little shellies" of 550 m.y. ago, which are tiny but show the first sign of skeletonization. The large shelly fossils like trilobites don't appear until the third stage of the Cambrian, 520 m.y. ago, some 80 m.y. after the first members of their phylum. Hardly an "explosion"! This is all well documented in the paleontological literature but creationists like Meyer don't care to read anything up to date or change their lies to reflect what scientists really know--a classic example of lying to their audiences and intellectual dishonesty. The entire premise of the book is "I can't explain how this happened, therefore no one can, therefore the 'intelligent designer'/God did it". That may convince their audiences, but that is not how science works. Scientists don't just give up and say "some god/intelligent designer did it" when a problem is hard--they buckle down and work harder. And if you read any number of good trade books by actual scientists (not frauds like Meyer) on the biochemical research on the origin of life, you'll find they've made HUGE progress on nearly every step of the problem. They haven't created life in a test tube yet--but they are very close. But reading garbage like this by a non-scientist without an inkling of honesty, you would never know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC