|
Review Summary: Smithy's take. |
Date: 2008-10-24 |
|
| |
|
Details: I really enjoyed reading this book.Dr Wells does a good job in trying to level the balance that the one eyed media have produced in portraying Darwinism as a fact and anybody deviating from that as a Philistine on a par with those who believe in fairies,little green men and ESP.Well done Jonathan Wells.Your book should be in every library. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Ashamed at the Small Minded, Simpleton Arguments Against ID Theorists |
Date: 2008-07-01 |
|
|
| |
|
Details: I cannot believe the petty-minded arguments and character assassinations being leveled against ID proponents and their theory nowadays. I have an M.A. in Anthropology from an accredited midwestern U.S. university. ID theorists for the most part are legitimate scientists speaking out at great personal cost in the fields of their expertise, as this author is doing. The childish nature of the disinformation campaign being used to turn away max people from buying and reading I.D. books nauseates me, and makes me even ashamed. It should do the same similarly to any open-minded, even-handed scholar. Read this book for what it claims to be and weigh its arguments carefully. Anti-ID propaganda is a travesty steeped in antireligious malice and bitterness. See it for what it is and steer clear of it. For one, it is a distortion campaign steeped in (or more accurately put -- permeated with) mob-like, bullying activity, systematically violating accepted tenets of argumentation theory. This author has the qualifications as he states and he appears less biased than many of his accusers. Read his book for what it states it stands for (considering its point of view), weigh its arguments, and then decide for yourself what to think! Adjust your persuasion only if or as needed, then endeavor to stop these bigots (aka the petty critics of I.D. theory) from fomenting riot and possibly a civil war in our midst. |
| |
|
Review Summary: Not a quick read, but worth it |
Date: 2007-06-21 |
|
|
| |
Details: I can't even attempt to be as wordy as the professional reviewers who have already reviewed this, so just let me make a few simple comments.
One is that critiques of ID accuse anyone who considered ID to be plausible MUST be doing so because they believe in God. Therefore, goes the simple argument, they are anti-science "Creationists." It is clear from this book that ID is far from being anti-science, and its proponents are clearly not bibilical literalist creationists.
The book posits that many of those who most vehemently oppose ID are themselves doing so because they do not believe in God. Atheism v. Theism. As the author of the book points out, a scientific evaluation must rise above basic metaphysical presupositions and not deny the evidence or lack of evidence because it conflicts with one's metaphysical starting point.
The author argues (I think persuasively) that many core presupositions in Darwinsim are not supported scientifically. He also argues that empirical observation suggests "Intelligent Design."
In no way does this book attempt to prove that God exists. But it also points out that Darwinist ideas do not prove the non-existence of God.
Darwin was not an atheist. He said that he was agnostic and that he did not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation.
This book is good for agnostics, but atheists will hate it.
|
| |
|
Review Summary: Excellent! |
Date: 2008-10-26 |
|
|
| |
|
Details: This is a very good book. If you wish a more scientific approach to ID, I would refer you to Michael Behe's "Edge of Evolution." |
| |
|
Review Summary: Many of the reviews of this book are being written by people |
Date: 2007-08-28 |
|
|
| |
Details: who have not read it.
It is a well written, easy to understand book on an Theory of Darwinism and Intelligent Design.
This book is easy read and will get your brain in gear as you analyize both sides of the story. When, as suggested by the author I took a look at my son's biology book and saw Haeckel's sketches I was convinced.
"To support his case he [Haeckel] began to fake evidence. Charged with fraud by five professors and convicted by a university court at Jena, he agreed that a small percentage of his embryonic drawings were forgeries; he was merely filling in and reconstructing the missing links when the evidence was thin, and he claimed unblushingly that hundreds of the best observers and biologists lie under the same charge."--*Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution (1984), p. 120.
For that alone it is worth your time. |
| |
out of 94 Reviews
