Scan barcode
ahsansenan's review against another edition
3.0
The single best critique of ID I have read, yet, the best part about this book is that unlike most other books of this or similar topic, this is a book without an agenda or ulterior motive.
Shanks takes a purely scientific approach to taking apart the components of ID argument, one at a time, and at no point does he come off as outspoken or opinionated. He presents facts to educate the readers, not to convert them and personally, that really is the best route to take.
Five out of five. The book was equally entertaining and informative.
Shanks takes a purely scientific approach to taking apart the components of ID argument, one at a time, and at no point does he come off as outspoken or opinionated. He presents facts to educate the readers, not to convert them and personally, that really is the best route to take.
Five out of five. The book was equally entertaining and informative.
tareka's review against another edition
4.0
The argument Niall is well presented. He managed to list all of the controversial subjects of creation vs mindless nature in a logical organized way. I’ve respected his scientific approach to counter the creation theory for the universe in calm and a detailed methodology with an open mind. A rare approach from similar atheists writers. Agreeing with his arguments is a different matter. I believe that he didn’t manage to personally convince me that this vast universe, the amazing human body, the perfectly balanced ecosystem could be just by “ luck” or an accident by a “dumb” mindless nature. To the contrary, he managed to display in the several cases he discussed from the Behe argument, closed systems and perfectly balanced universe to the big bang that all of this is impossible for a logical, reasonable and scientific person to believe that it just happened without an intelligent creator.
Yes, If i see a watch i would still believe someone has created it. William Paley’s example is still valid centuries after he discussed it. Niall and most atheists ignore the simplest logic that Paley has presented brillianty. It's a simple founded logic that is hard to refute. Niall also totally ignores the most important question the source of life itself. What is driving all the creatures in the universe? The essences of life that until today science theories fails to answer. Resting the answer that we still have gaps in our knowledge is not satisfactory enough. What Niall misses and his fellow atheists writers that believing in an intelligent creator for the universe is not necessarily against believing in evolution. My faith in a creator is well established through science. Science presentes how complex, integrated and massive is the human body and the universe that simply no mindless nature can create.
Yes, If i see a watch i would still believe someone has created it. William Paley’s example is still valid centuries after he discussed it. Niall and most atheists ignore the simplest logic that Paley has presented brillianty. It's a simple founded logic that is hard to refute. Niall also totally ignores the most important question the source of life itself. What is driving all the creatures in the universe? The essences of life that until today science theories fails to answer. Resting the answer that we still have gaps in our knowledge is not satisfactory enough. What Niall misses and his fellow atheists writers that believing in an intelligent creator for the universe is not necessarily against believing in evolution. My faith in a creator is well established through science. Science presentes how complex, integrated and massive is the human body and the universe that simply no mindless nature can create.
More...