Good empirical science searches for explanations that fit the evidence. But another kind of “science” is committed to telling stories about unguided evolution.
A muddle emerges from textbooks’ unprincipled use of theology.
At a debate in Chicago between Dawkins and Bret Weinstein, I witnessed something that I never thought I’d see.
“The human eye is a well-tread [sic] example of how evolution can produce a clunky design,” writes Professor Lents.
Vertebrate eyes work reasonably well, Richard Dawkins conceded, but “it is the principle of the thing that would offend any tidy-minded engineer!”