In a book review on Darwinism and natural selection, Daniel Dennett laments: "I was disconcerted to overhear some medical students talking in a bar recently. One exclaimed: ‘How could anybody believe in evolution after learning about the intricacies of the DNA replication machinery?'"
How, indeed! Nevertheless, the indefatigable Darwinist is ready with an answer:
"To the extent that well-meaning evolutionists had inadvertently convinced them [the med students] that Darwinians are eager to gloss over or deny these facts, this is evidence that the political tactic of denying teleology root and branch is apt to be self-defeating."
When a scientific theory is rejected by scientificallyeducated people despite 150 years of scientific evidence and decades of political tactics, that’s bad, very bad. And Dennett knows it.
But instead of suggesting a revision to the theory to accommodate “actual” design, Dennett proposes explaining how “apparent” design is accomplished by natural means. But isn’t that what Richard Dawkins, Kenneth Miller, Daniel Dennett, and the rest of the Darwinian faithful have been doing for years now?
I’ll bet Dennett had another drink (or two) before leaving the bar that night.