Darwinism: Where is the theory?

[bluemoonKY]

I recently watched a debate between believers and non-believers in Darwinism, and David Berlinski made some pithy remarks for the non-believers in Darwinism. I am going to make some of his points and ask some of the questions he asked in this thread.

David Berlinski says that he agrees with Darwinists that things change, but he asks where is the theory of Darwinism beyong having a name? Berlinski says it's always easy to persuage yourself that you've understood something when you haven't understood a thing. The issue before us is not whether retroactively we can explain an adaptation, but whether we can draw that adaptation from general principles. This is what Darwinian theory cannot do, and this is the requirement of normal science.

So, I ask, where is the theory?

 

[D H]

Thread locked for a number of reasons. David Berlinski is a crackpot who sees every bit of added evidence as doubling the amount we don't know. There's no winning a debate with someone who sees adding knowledge as adding ignorance. The Discovery Institute for which he works is crackpot central. The term Darwinism is derogatory, implying that biologists pray at the idol of Darwin. "Where is the theory"? Everywhere. The evidence is overwhelming and fills multiple books, multiple journals. This final point breaks last straw. On any internet forum, it is inappropriate to ask a question that requires us to write a book (or in this case, a huge chunk of a library) as an answer.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

You may be interested to read our introduction to evolution, further resources are linked at the end.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=543950