Slashdot Mirror

For some clear, simple, lucid counterpoints to the Homeobox genes being the proof of punctuated equilibria, see this PDF or this updated paper.

For those too tired of this discussion to read the papers, print them and read them later. They're worth it, especially the PDF one.

I don't think rankings of creationist/evolutionist sites will be a problem, as long as more information than just the average 1-10 rank or the majority vote is provided. If a web surfer runs across the two competing Talk.Origins archives, and discovers that on each one sizable groups of people have voted for both "completely factual" and "completely false", then said web surfer will have to (guess what) think for themselves. In this case, that's not a bad thing, because the better evolutionists and creationst are all smart enough to provide references, the references are increasingly linked to online, and so with a web rating system it would at least be possible to get most of the facts straight in that debate, even if many people consider the conclusions still debatable.

What I would worry about is stuff like this post, which got modded up for a little while because it sounded technically informed, before one or two of the replies showed how to verify that it was bullshit. Peer review works for academic research because it is actually review by one's peers who can be expected to fully understand the articles in question. If you extend that "peer group" to be the entire internet, then people who know what they're talking about are lost in the noise. At the least, this "web fact ratings" system would have to allow for moderators to add comments and links to justify their opinions.

A "rate everything" website wouldn't be too hard to do; there were a couple companies trying (although not doing a great job IMHO) last time I checked. I'd start with something like the slash code, but with the story ids replaced by arbitrary URLs. Open a "story", and in one frame it gives you the website (put through a caching filter so that link tags take you to the ratings site for the linked page) and in the other frame it gives you veracity ratings, related links, commentary, etc. Add a front page with the ability to search through most popular pages, most active stories, etc. and you'd rake in the hits.

Thanks for the link. The talk.origins site is quite interesting, and is going to take quite awhile to read. It is all quite slanted toward macro-evolution as an indisputable fact.

But macro-evolution is disputed. Check out the other side of the debate at trueorigin.org. This site has rebuttals to many of the talk.origins FAQs, and seems no less interesting or worth reading.

I recommend that both sites be checked out. For the record, I am a Christian who believes that God created everything, including life. I don't know literally how He did it, but I'm not afraid of investigating the evidence and ideas put forth by both creationists and evolutionists. I doubt that anyone is 100% correct.