Would it, in fact, be enlightening if you were to sit a Darwinist and a Darwin skeptic together for an extended period of time to talk and see what really lies at the bottom of their disagreement?
It sound like an anachronistic political endorsement, but it’s true: the Kepler spacecraft is supporting Michael Denton’s fine-tuning campaign with large contributions of data.
I asked David Berlinski and Michael Denton what they thought was the nub of intellectual difference between a thoughtful Darwkin skeptic and a thoughtful Darwin loyalist.
David Berlinski notes, “Applying Darwinian principles to problems of this level of complexity is like putting a Band-Aid on a wound caused by an atomic weapon.”
The dual wave and particulate aspects of light, essential to our ability to see, and so much else, must all be just right to within insanely precise parameters.