SoylentNews

More than 1,000 Scientists have Signed ‘Dissent from Darwinism’ Statement

posted by martyb on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:12PM   
from the scientific-method dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

Earlier this month, a long kept list of Ph.D. scientists who “dissent from Darwinism” reached a milestone — it crossed the threshold of 1,000 signers.

“There are 1,043 scientists on the ‘A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism’ list. It passed the 1,000 mark this month,” said Sarah Chaffee, a program officer for the Discovery Institute, which maintains the list.

“A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism” is a simple, 32-word statement that reads: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

https://www.thecollegefix.com/more-than-1000-scientists-sign-dissent-from-darwinism-statement/

---

Original Submission

• Still unhealthy. Evidence or never mind. Still unhealthy. Evidence or never mind. (Score: 4, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:15PM (1 child)

  by fyngyrz (6567) on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:15PM (#801176) Journal

  Yes there is a point to it as I pointed out, it gives these people a place to explore their ideas instead of being shoved into the corner for a time out.

  They're in precisely the same "place" as the flat-earthers. Absolutely no evidence for, as contrasted to the proverbial metric fuckton of evidence against. If that changes, fine, we should listen. So far it hasn't (and it doesn't seem at all likely to, either.)

  Just because some random person with (or without) a degree has an idea doesn't mean that idea is worth anything. Science in particular uses a method that does a decent job of winnowing out things that don't hold up under the weight of consensually experiential, repeatable, non-falsifiable examination.

  OTOH, when a scientist in an unrelated field produces an assertion about another field that goes against all the evidence in that other field, then the onus is totally on them to produce evidence that can withstand scientific scrutiny to support that assertion; until or unless they do, there's no point at all in taking them seriously or giving them the benefit of the doubt. Doesn't mean they can't work on it, of course — but until they do worthy work on it, they have nothing of value.

  --
  Research shows that 6 out of 7 dwarves aren't happy.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+2
  Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
  Extra 'Insightful' Modifier		0
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		4

• Re:Still unhealthy. Evidence or never mind. (Score: -1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:40PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:40PM (#801196)

  *WOOOOOOOOOOOSH*

  You rabid "science" pushers are just as bad as religious evangelicals. You should applaud their skepticism even if you disagree with their conclusions / positions. Often times science has advanced by trying to prove one thing but finding out another. Heaping hate and scorn adds nothing of value here, at least wait until they put forth a stupid theory with no evidence.

  The group points out that signing the statement does not mean these scholars endorse “alternative theories such as self-organization, structuralism, or intelligent design,” but rather simply indicates “skepticism about modern Darwinian theories central claim that natural selection acting on random mutations is the driving force behind the complexity of life.”

  You may get the +5 insightful riding the hate-train, but as you pointed out consensus doesn't make you right! Don't worry, I'll get my own Hemlock.

  Parent