Frankly, his conclusions are logical for his system of belief about beginnings, which rejects the notion that an Intelligent Designer had anything to do with the way things are on Planet Earth.
Wrong, and I pointed this out:
Nothing Watson said on intelligence is demonstrated by the scientific literature. And, in fact, his statements are refuted by the literature just as Charles Murray’s claims are.
And history in the United States demonstrates the problem. His assumption of distinct populations that do not interbreed is simply false. African-Americans in the United States frequently, if not usually, have white ancestors. Even in the case of isolated tribes in Africa, there is significant genetic evidence that the populations of humans interbreed frequently and such genetic isolation does not exist in reality.
Because Eaton has a caricature of science, she doesn’t understand apparently anything in the post that directly refutes her claim above. Watson isn’t making a scientific conclusion, he’s making an idiotic bigoted statement refuted by science.
There are not distinct human populations that are not interbred and so at the most basic assumption of Watson’s claim is wrong and nothing logically can follow. Insisting it does does as much abuse to the scientific process as Watson does in his silly claims.
Furthermore, the entire conception of intelligence is flawed as Watson tries to claim. Of course, the primary person that kind of garbage isn’t Watson, it’s conservative hack Charles Murray.
Finally, evolution isn’t a theory of beginnings–it is a theory about how life on earth changes over time. More specifically how alleles vary from generation to generation. Having a basic grasp of what one is talking about is, in most company, considered good form.
Because the intricacies of a micro-organism and the incomprehensible details of something as complex as the human eye or the ear, the brain, the heart, the lungs, not to mention the unfathomable depths of the sea, the infinite universe around us all clearly point to an Intelligent Designer rather than a Cosmic Coincidence, I am a “moron” and a “sh(r)ill beast”?
No, you are moron because you are confusing entire fields of science and multiple theories with one theory that discusses how life has changed over time on Earth.
Evolution doesn’t address God. It addresses biological life that is observable. Unless one believes the evidence for evolution was planted to test one’s faith or perhaps to discover why 42 is so important, it’s the most parsimonious and only non-falsified theory to explain life on Earth as it exists now.
Nice HGTTG reference. Hope the Vogons don’t destroy Illinois’ crossroads for high comedy and hilarious hijinks in order to put in a highway.
And I wonder if Franny’ll ever feel it necessary to “apologize for the inconvenience”.
[…] Not so Fran Eaton. As Arch explains she apparently lacks a junior high level understanding of biology. And because she doesn’t understand, she exclaims that she must be right. In other words, she does not think, therefore she’s adamant that the Biblical allegory is fact and that she was made from mud and one of Adam’s ribs. […]
OK, maybe the brain is “incomprehensible” and will largely remain so for a long time, since sticking a screwdriver in there and jiggling it around to see what happens is kinda unethical. But the eye? The heart? I think we actually comprehend them pretty well.
The heart is a big bag of muscle that pumps blood around. That’s pretty much it. The eye has most of the same parts as a microscope in a high school science lab. Incompreheisible? I don’t think that word means what she thinks it means.
Anyway the whole argument boils down to “It’s really, really hard to understand. Therefore, God did it.”
Not just “God did it” … her version of “God”, no one else’s.
[…] Regardless of whether she’s being soft or acidic in her myopia, myopia it is. The entirety of her premise that Sen. Obama’s Christian church is somehow “bad” and that he is somehow “hypocritical” is based on her own ignorance of the history African American Christianity in this country and her own misreadings of Trinity United Church of Christ’s tenets related to liberation, compassion, charity and community. (Oh, and her disdain for people who dislike her hero, George W. Bush, crossed with a deeply partisan loathing for Sen. Obama himself — to be expected from a former campaigner for Alan Keyes for Senate, Illinois edition.) The intertwined network of conservative partisan media has helped her efforts at promoting this ignorant misinterpretation of basic information. (This wouldn’t be the first time Ms. Eaton proved to be ignorant and apparently willfuly misinformed, nor the second, nor the third, nor the… you get the idea.) […]