Well, duh... This is old news when it comes ot health-related issues. But for those of us interested in the so-called 'creation-evolution debate', it is not only old news, this folksy 'common sense' approach to technical issues it is one of the biggest pains in the neck we see.
I was perusing some old posts at the ISCID Brainstorms forum, a place where pro-ID creationists get together to pat each other on the back for no real reason. It was supposedly established, as the name implies, as a place where 'ID theorists' could come together to, well, brainstorm about 'Intelligent Design' and such. It quickly turned into the usual place where non-scientist creationists gathered to badmouth evolution. It died on the vine, more or less, as did the entire site (see this list of forums there, and look at the dates of last activity).
Anyway, I was perusing some old threads there, and the arguments of a creationist asthma researcher, Peter Borger, impressed at least one of the non-science types there:
“Can some aspect of Darwinism be falsified?”
Zachriel [a biologist] wrote:Nothing has been persuasive that evolution doesn't occur, or that it does
not continue to act as the unifying theory of biology.
From a perspective outside the field of biology PB's argument is persuasive...
Funny how that works... A biologist says that none of the biolgy-related arguments he's seen are convincing, a non-biologist says that from outside of biology, they do.
PB's [Peter Borger's] argument is essentially that redundant genes falsify evolution, among other silly things.
No wonder so many people find the yammerings of creationists with biology-related degrees persuasive - they don't know any better because they are not biologists!