Rob Stadler received a BS in biomedical engineering from Case Western Reserve University, an MS in electrical engineering from MIT, and a PhD in medical engineering from the Harvard/MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology. With 19 years of experience as a scientist in the medical device industry, he has authored 17 peer-reviewed manuscripts, has obtained more than 100 US patents, and his research and innovation have contributed to medical devices that are implanted in over 1 million patients worldwide.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Questo libro mostra come molte affermazioni che ci vengono propinate come se fossero scienza assodata in realtà di scientifico hanno molto poco. Spiega quali sono i parametri in base ai quali si può dire che un'affermazione qualsiasi è scientifica o no. Andrebbe tradotto in italiano e letto nelle scuole superiori
Having read many books on evolutionism, creationism and intelligent design I’ve realised how close to impossible it is to write on these subjects in an impartial, unbiased and thoroughly objective way. As Rob Stadler says himself in this book: “Everyone has bias. Everyone” and that includes himself of course and me too. However, this author does something very clever here; he gets Science to do the talking. If Science could speak to us it would exhort us to exercise caution in its use as a tool for acquiring knowledge, and to recognise its merits and shortcomings. Science is a wonderful thing and can speak eloquently in very many areas but there are other areas where it just might have limitations and still others where it must of necessity remain silent; it all depends on the level of confidence in its explanatory power. The title of the book mischievously implies that there hasn’t been a scientific approach to evolution thus far. Outrageous you may think. Well, seemingly not. I was surprised at what I didn’t know. Mr Stadler has distilled, from his tough and highly successful commercial experience in the medical field, the terms upon which science tells us it must be deployed; six criteria of high and low confidence science. To deviate from these would be to abuse science and risk perpetrating fallacies. He has another laudable objective too. Adhering to this scientific method will hopefully take some of the heat out of the debate over origins. While evolutionists will have to recognise the perils of bias, assumption and retrospective investigation, creationists too will have to resist bias and bow to incontrovertible high confidence science. Both will have to recognise the subjectivity inherent in low confidence science. Mr Dawkins comes in for occasional criticism (apparently with some justification) and, at one point, is portrayed not as a scientist but as an unscrupulous salesman selling atheism to an unsuspecting public! Rob Stadler asks, quite mildly, if now is perhaps the time to begin taking the scientific high ground. I think I would ask why hasn’t the scientific high ground been taken hitherto and if not why not. I certainly can’t think of a plausible reason why it shouldn’t be taken from now on. I had to read the book twice. First time I was able to take in the general thrust and the second time I got to grips more with his examples of high and low confidence science when investigating common descent, mutations, natural selection and survival of the fittest and how his approach sheds light on the validity of the evolution theory. It is very compelling. I wish I had been taught the six criteria of high/low confidence science in biology at school. They should be taught now so that students can be enabled to think with more clarity and to examine with greater insight what they are taught about origins. A highly informative book written with equanimity. Thanks to Mr Stadler for sharing his hard won knowledge and experience and for calmly clarifying the scientific method and its application to this emotive subject.
(Not sure what the 'voting buttons' text hereinafter means - not something I've knowingly tried to do or even understand)
The general argument presented in this book is not new. Other critics of evolutionary theory have frequently pointed out the essential differences between the types of data used to support that theory with those that validate the empirical sciences, such as the laws of thermodynamics. Evolutionists typically confuse the issue by conflating the two classes of data.
Rob Stadler confines his critique of evolutionary theory to this one aspect. He develops the argument systematically and in great detail, taking the discussion to a higher level. He sets out the various criteria used in his own field of medical research to assess the claims made for medical innovations such as new drugs or medical devices. He describes the different classes of tests and the confidence levels associated with them. Because the well-being or even the lives of patients are at stake, it is vital that the claims made for medical innovations pass those tests that have the highest confidence levels.
The author proceeds to apply the various tests to the different types of evidence offered to support evolutionary theory. He shows that evidence used to support evolution on a small scale, such as the limited changes observed in biological populations to adapt to environmental changes, pass the high confidence level tests, but evidence used to support evolution on a grand scale, i.e. those that involve the crossing of major taxonomic boundaries, fail the high confidence level tests. In other words, evidence for micro-evolution are well supported, but evidence for macro-evolution are not.
A simple example is the use of variation among dog breeds to argue for evolution. The differences are limited to such traits as size and colour. Conspicuously no novel structures are involved, and these are intrinsic to macro-evolution. To extrapolate micro-evolutionary change to a macro scale is mere speculation, and does not merit confidence.
For an in depth discussion read the book itself. For additional reading, I strongly recommend Lee Spetner’s
The Evolution Revolution
.
Stadler ends with a discussion of the effects of evolutionary bias on education, and appeals for honesty in the teaching of evolution. The book includes two appendices and an index.
5.0 out of 5 starsThis book is highly recommended to anyone who wants to further their understanding of ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 30, 2017
Verified Purchase
Devastating appraisal of low confidence evidence used to justify the theory of evolution. It is only 200 pages long but is very effective at showing that the type of evidence put forward to support evolution(sets of fossils) does not stand up to proper scientific scrutiny.
This book is highly recommended to anyone who wants to further their understanding of the evolution debate. If you are really interested in this debate about the origins of man you should also read the books by Cornelius hunter.
5.0 out of 5 starsHis simple, elegant, unbiased presentation of the scope and criteria for confidence in scientific endeavour is refreshing.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 4, 2017
Verified Purchase
I really enjoyed reading this book, the science hums. I work as a peer reviewer for the JIBMS and have reflect on my notes from this book while reviewing. I also work as a Christian Pastor and I finally get why some scientists think there is any value in the idea of evolution. His simple, elegant, unbiased presentation of the scope and criteria for confidence in scientific endeavour is refreshing and very helpful.