adaptationists

My point about "giving a point to ID" or "taking one from evolution" was in reference to the fact that adaptationists have predicted a lot of function a long time before ID had its genesis.

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

I can't say why Dawkins says what he says, but adaptationists are able to predict function given the observed nature of selection.

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

We can disregard the fact that many adaptationists have predicted "not really junk" because Dawkins alone didn't jump on that bandwagon?

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

We can disregard the fact that many adaptationists have predicted "not really junk" because Dawkins alone didn't jump on that bandwagon?

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

Not all selectionists and adaptationists thought searching for function was a helpful avenue of research.

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

Are you proposing that since I don't know the argument of the Public Understander of Science, that I should give adaptationists a point?

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

The drive to satisfy that yearning, according to both adaptationists and byproduct theorists, might be an inevitable and eternal part of what Atran calls the tragedy of human cognition.

Darwin's God

The drive to satisfy that yearning, according to both adaptationists and byproduct theorists, might be an inevitable and eternal part of what Atran calls the tragedy of human cognition.

Darwin's God

Strict adaptationists have predicted a whole lot of function long before ID was around.

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers

Not all selectionists and adaptationists thought searching for function was a helpful avenue of research.

A Dubious "Opportunity" for IDers