Another example. Toward the end of his interview with me, Stein asked whether I could think of any circumstances whatsoever under which intelligent design might have occurred. It's the kind of challenge I relish, and I set myself the task of imagining the most plausible scenario I could. I wanted to give ID its best shot, however poor that best shot might be. I must have been feeling magnanimous that day, because I was aware that the leading advocates of Intelligent Design are very fond of protesting that they are not talking about God as the designer, but about some unnamed and unspecified intelligence, which might even be an alien from another planet. Indeed, this is the only way they differentiate themselves from fundamentalist creationists, and they do it only when they need to, in order to weasel their way around church/state separation laws. So, bending over backwards to accommodate the IDiots (“oh NOOOOO, of course we aren't talking about God, this is SCIENCE”) and bending over backwards to make the best case I could for intelligent design, I constructed a science fiction scenario. Like Michael Ruse (as I surmise) I still hadn't rumbled Stein, and I was charitable enough to think he was an honestly stupid man, sincerely seeking enlightenment from a scientist. I patiently explained to him that life could conceivably have been seeded on Earth by an alien intelligence from another planet (Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel suggested something similar – semi tongue-in-cheek). The conclusion I was heading towards was that, even in the highly unlikely event that some such ‘Directed Panspermia’ was responsible for designing life on this planet, the alien beings would THEMSELVES have to have evolved, if not by Darwinian selection, by some equivalent ‘crane’ (to quote Dan Dennett). My point here was that design can never be an ULTIMATE explanation for organized complexity. Even if life on Earth was seeded by intelligent designers on another planet, and even if the alien life form was itself seeded four billion years earlier, the regress must ultimately be terminated (and we have only some 13 billion years to play with because of the finite age of the universe). Organized complexity cannot just spontaneously happen.

Креационистская теория сложнее любой другой, поскольку в её аргументацию входят не только научные обоснования, но и философские. Потому Креационизм шире и непротиворечивее любой другой теории происхождения языка.

Тем не менее общим для этой совокупности концепций является то, что они отвергаются большинством учёных как ненаучные как минимум по критерию фальсифицируемости Карла Поппера: выводы из посылок креационизма не имеют предсказательной силы, так как не могут быть проверены экспериментом. Лица, позицирующие себя как креационистские учёные, часто используют приёмы демагогии («давление» на эмоции), подтасовки, допускают (зачастую элементарные) ошибки при расчётах. Многие не имеют специального образования.

Не может здоровый человек провести ночь в весельи и танцах, без наркотиков !

При всем уважении к Гарри Поттеру, у нас есть свои герои, наш герой - Иван-дурак

медиа-персонаж? по контексту догадываюсь, что пропутинский? да бросьте вы, ему деньги платят… Если б мне платили как ДАМу, я б тоже согласился рассуждать про сколково с серьезным видом…

со слюной и злобной пеной густо сыпят глупостями, волнообразными иероглифами и прочими ошметками своего убогого интеллектуального творчества