Experimental Archaeology. Photo (cc) Wessex Archaeology.
I wish I was as good an archaeologist as Michael Egnor claims to be. Egnor has recently written on the Antikythera Mechanism from a creationist point of view. To be honest I disagree with some of it, the words mainly, but the spaces and punctuation on the other hand seem sound. Christopher O’Brien has given the words far more attention than they deserve, so if you want a critique of the propositions ((It took me half an hour to choose that word. Facts as the blog entry makes clear wouldn’t have been the right choice)) then it’s a great read. What I find difficult is the repeated claim by creationists that you can simply see design.
It’s a common claim. When fundamentalists Cameron and Comfort are notexhorting people to stick banana-shaped objects into their mouths they make claims like: “If you stuck a group of scientists in a room with a painting then, with nothing from the outside world, they would conclude there was a painter.” Now I don’t think they would. I cannot simply see design in complex objects, so are the creationists wrong or am I thick?