Darwin’s Doubt and Ray Comfort’s Certainty

Darwin’s Doubt and Ray Comfort’s Certainty September 6, 2013

There have been lot of devastating reviews of Stephen Meyer’s book Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design. One recent one is by Larry Moran, and it sums up one of the problems with the book in a picture:

The circle indicates the small moment in the history of life that Meyer’s book focuses on. And so the book isn’t dealing with the origin of life or most of the history of life on this planet, and the extensive genetic as well as other evidence for the course of that history. It is focusing on a particular period, noting that we do not currently know why certain things took the course that they did during that period, and then arguing “therefore Intelligent Design.”

Just as that is a “Designer of the Gaps” argument, Tyler Francke has warned about Ray Comfort’s “Jesus of the Gaps” argument. He also shared a screenshot of the profoundly stupid comment Comfort offered in response to Francke’s review of his deceitful movie:

Comfort must really hate Christianity to offer so much deceit and nonsense in the name of Christianity, making the entire faith look as foolish and misguided as he is.

In related news, Jerry Coyne shared information about getting Meyer’s book recategorized on Amazon, and if you haven’t discovered it already, check out the new NCSE blog!


"Yes, I agree. Technical arguments which supposedly prove (or disprove) the Resurrection are a waste ..."

Copycat Anti-Religion
"I think healthy skepticism is warranted in the case of Calvin and Colombetti's argument. We ..."

Copycat Anti-Religion
"And happy April Fools! I hope you're getting your prank on! https://www.youtube.com/wat..."

Barton Breen Quote About Inerrancy
"No real place to post this, but I wanted to share I'm very excited to ..."

Barton Breen Quote About Inerrancy

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • TomS

    One thing about that concentration on the Cambrian is that I wonder what comfort this gives to the intended audience. How does it relate to our not being related to monkeys, or that we stand in a special relationship to our Creator and Redeemer, or that Somebody really cares about things over the vast stretches of time, or whatever? What does an evolution-denier take away from this book, even assuming that everything in it is accurate? Is it only that the pointy-heads got something wrong?
    I know that the book doesn’t present an actual alternative account of what did happen in the Cambrian, but that’s a somewhat different issue.

  • seba

    Let me ask you one more time, ARE YOU SURE that Ray Comfort is not a comedian, making fun of christianity? Because I think he is doing exactly that.

    • I am in no way sure of that. It would explain a great deal of it.

      In fact, since there’s not much evidence of it but a sort-of-solid circumstantial case, and certainly some lack of evidence either way … I guess that he must be. Never mind.

      • I often wonder that. It sometimes seems as if certain individuals’ aim is not in fact to defend the belief system they claim to adhere to, but to make it an object of ridicule.

  • The main problem with ID, which irritates and sometimes even infuriates me, is their ignoble use of a God-of-the-Gap reasoning to positively proof that God exists.

    They are often entirely right that there are quite a few things evolution cannot CURRENTLY explains.

    But how the hell can they assert this will be the case in 20, 200 or 2000 years?

    For this very reason, buying their conclusions can most often be traced back to wishful thinking.

    Actually they are greatly undermining the Christian faith and ought to be opposed for God’s sake.

    Lothars Sohn – Lothar’s son


  • John Pieret

    Thanks for the link but this is the one with a list of reviews (which will, shortly, include Larry’s):


    BTW, I am so stealing Schrodinger’s cat!

    • Thanks! It is a good thing that there have been so many reviews that I can’t keep track of where they all are and where they are rounded up! 🙂

      • TomS

        A problem with reviews – especially reviews from scientists – is that they can give the impression that there is something worth the time to review: There really is a “controversy”. “I don’t understand a word in the book, but there must be something to it if it gets all of that furious response from those who have their assumptions challenged.”