Fuller vs. Grayling 'Intelligent Design' Smackdown

sdep

I was about to post this in our evo thread, but then reread Galvasean's cautionary first post ('This is not another thread to discuss evolution versus creationism') and decided not to sully it. I couldn't see any suitable live threads this side of the fence though, hence this one.

So, here's an entertaining philosophical bare knuckle fight over the new Intelligent Design book 'Dissent over Descent' penned by 'philosopher-sociologist' and Dover defence witness Steve Fuller. Atheist philosopher AC Grayling reviewed it for New Humanist mag and spat it out. That's when the fun began.

Grayling's review.
Fuller's reply.
Grayling's subsequent reply.
And on they go in the forum.

For anyone coming to this anew, the debate takes a canter through the old favourites:

Religion started science! - No, the Greeks did!
Evolution/ID can't be falsified! (delete where applicable)
You can't have Popper - he's ours!
Atheists don't exist! - What about unicorns?
Science is just an atheist worldview! - You don't use toasters, then?
Chance! - Selection!
Design! - Retinas!
Galileo, Galileo...

With a few new twists, and plenty of mud. Who's left standing? I won't spoil it - read it and decide.

NB - I'm not planning on starting an A&A version of the notorious creationism thread.
I just thought people might find the above an interesting read.

Oh, and the results of New Humanist's poll:
Should we bother talking to creationists?
Yes - debate is good 333 (23%)
No - we should just ignore them 1092 (76%)

Chastened, I shall vow to leave the BC&P thread alone.

studiorat

me too.

Galvasean

Don't abandon me! It gets lonely in there with only J C to talk to. His English isn't good.

Asiaprod

Galvasean wrote: »

Don't abandon me! It gets lonely in there with only J C to talk to. His English isn't good.

Ah, but his graphics! He does not speak in tongues, JC is evolution in action, the epitome of survival of the fittest, natural selection, for he speaks in internet em-icons:)

studiorat

That's not discussion that's just abuse.

That whole text shouting is specifically to wind people up. I'm starting to think it's a big troll.

He's demented by his notion of original sin. Even if I were inclined to theisim I'd run a mile from a dangerous lunatic like that.

Asiaprod

studiorat wrote: »

That whole text shouting is specifically to wind people up. I'm starting to think it's a big troll.

But a useful one, others have learned a lot from that thread. Therein lies its worth. Its an education that would take years of schooling to learn.:)

Galvasean

Asiaprod wrote: »

But a useful one, others have learned a lot from that thread. Therein lies its worth. Its an education that would take years of schooling to learn.:)

Or a few minutes.
"See this? Tripe. Next topic."

Galvasean

studiorat wrote: »

That whole text shouting is specifically to wind people up. I'm starting to think it's a big troll.

Only starting?

MrPudding

Asiaprod wrote: »

But a useful one, others have learned a lot from that thread. Therein lies its worth. Its an education that would take years of schooling to learn.:)

Very true, as Atomic and other have said, they will never change JC, but if they stop one other person from believing that utter sh1t then it is worth it. I think JC himself does a lot of good work for the evolution side. I think most people can see he is talking through his arse and simply does not have answers for even the most basic questions.

MrP

sdep

Before I went there, I didn't really know the full extent of what creationists believe, or why, so it was interesting to find out. It's also a handy place to brush up on science. I think I've now seen enough cycles of the debate, but I'll still look in now and then.

And I still don't know whose side JC is on either.