This is the last extract of Jean Staune’s paper I’ll comment, and this isn’t about a quote by about his conclusions.
However, once we have demonstrated the existence of numerous non Darwinian alternatives, there is, nevertheless, one question which remains: the neo-Darwinians who have divided themselves into several schools of thought are still currently largely dominant in Biology.
This is due to the nature of the paradigm presently dominating the Life Sciences. Inherited from Newtonian Classical Physics, the mechanist and reductionist paradigms conceive the universe and the human being, at least by analogy, as one would construct a watch in a factory assembly line. However, it is precisely this paradigm which has totally disappeared our day in the realm of Physics.
Clearly Jean Staune show the existence of numerous non-darwinian approaches, none of them scientifically acceptable as per se. They may be the product of scientist, but not following a scientific mode.
Now, there is the analogy between the paradigm dominating the life sciences with the « watch factory assembly line ».
William Dembski would be happy if this was true.
The is a huge confusion between darwinism and Intelligent Design made here.
And I do know how to read a paragraph.😉
In a watch factory assembly line randomness is the exception, like in « sh*t happens ». In darwinism randomness (mutations) is the basis, like in « evolution happens ».
I do understand that Jean Staune don’t like some designists (the uncommon descent school), neither darwinists, and he try to defend a different position, but this kind of confusions is unacceptable, at least from a darwinist.
And by the way, I didn’t knew that randomness « totally disappeared our day in the realm of Physics »!