Rating: 
Summary: 'science by quote' and the usual creationist fluff
Review: After encountering ReMine on the internet on several occasions, I decided to read this book of his that he and lay creationists laud as the best thing written on the subject. After reading some of the reviews here, I must say that at first I thought I had read a different book. From an author who "knows what he is talking about"? He "pulls no punches yet he is not rude"?
First off, ReMine is not "Dr.ReMine". He has a master's degree in engineering.
Second, if you want to consider the fact that he accuses evolutionary biologists of colluding to hide the 'truth about Haldane's dilemma' for more than 40 years, and repeatedly referring to evolutionist 'storytelling', is not being 'rude', so be it.The substance of this volume is not in his use of quotes - which his 'customer service rep' told me via email is how some of the "best science" is done - but in his lack of them. He uses quote after quote - sometimes incorrectly, as in his quote of Van Valen on p. 219 - to support non-controversial subjects. For example, he uses 14 citations to support his statement that under Haldane's model, one gene per 300 generations can be substituted (p. 216). This is not in dispute. But how many citations does ReMine supply for this: "Think about it again. Is 1,667 selectively significant nucleotides enough to make a sapien out of a simian?" Ignore for now the clumsy prose, and look at what he is asking/saying. He is implying that 1,667 changes - in a genome of ~30-40,000 genes - is too few to account for human evolution from an apelike ancestor. Never mind that he does not identify the ancestor, so he has no way of knowing what changes have to be accounted for. But he is saying that more - many more (he mentions "500,000 selectively significant nucleotides" on p. 209, implying that even this is far too few; odd considering the size of the genic portion of the genome) are 'necessary'. THAT deserves some support - science by quote, if you will. And if you have or have read the book, tell us how many quotes ReMine provides to support this implication. None. Not one. This antic is repeated throughout the book - citations galore supportive of non-controversial facts, no citations at all supportive of his 'Biotic Message' fluff. ReMine says over and over that this or that in fact supports his 'theory'. He says over and over that his 'theory' is "robust", "testable", and "scientific." Readers and accolade-heapers should ask themselves - If this is true, why did not ReMine provide a single test? Why did not ReMine provide some real-life examples of the application of his 'theory'? What he did was lay out - usually in a demeaning way - some aspect of evolution and claim that it actually - magically - supports his 'theory', not evolution! And, more importantly, one should wonder why ReMine's amazing 'theory' can only be read about in his vanity press book? Why has he not written up manuscripts to be critiqued by his fellow scientists? The answer? Creationists prefer writing in a medium wherein they receive only praise from like-minded individuals, such as "John Woodmorappe", not where those that know better would demolish his flimsy, evidence-less claims. This book belongs on the scrap heap of egomaniacal creationist rants.
Rating:
Summary: 'science by quote' and the usual creationist fluff
Review: After encountering ReMine on the internet on several occasions, I decided to read this book of his that he and lay creationists laud as the best thing written on the subject. After reading some of the reviews here, I must say that at first I thought I had read a different book. From an author who "knows what he is talking about"? He "pulls no punches yet he is not rude"?
First off, ReMine is not "Dr.ReMine". He has a master's degree in engineering.
Second, if you want to consider the fact that he accuses evolutionary biologists of colluding to hide the 'truth about Haldane's dilemma' for more than 40 years, and repeatedly referring to evolutionist 'storytelling', is not being 'rude', so be it. The substance of this volume is not in his use of quotes - which his 'customer service rep' told me via email is how some of the "best science" is done - but in his lack of them. He uses quote after quote - sometimes incorrectly, as in his quote of Van Valen on p. 219 - to support non-controversial subjects. For example, he uses 14 citations to support his statement that under Haldane's model, one gene per 300 generations can be substituted (p. 216). This is not in dispute. But how many citations does ReMine supply for this: "Think about it again. Is 1,667 selectively significant nucleotides enough to make a sapien out of a simian?" Ignore for now the clumsy prose, and look at what he is asking/saying. He is implying that 1,667 changes - in a genome of ~30-40,000 genes - is too few to account for human evolution from an apelike ancestor. Never mind that he does not identify the ancestor, so he has no way of knowing what changes have to be accounted for. But he is saying that more - many more (he mentions "500,000 selectively significant nucleotides" on p. 209, implying that even this is far too few; odd considering the size of the genic portion of the genome) are 'necessary'. THAT deserves some support - science by quote, if you will. And if you have or have read the book, tell us how many quotes ReMine provides to support this implication. None. Not one. This antic is repeated throughout the book - citations galore supportive of non-controversial facts, no citations at all supportive of his 'Biotic Message' fluff. ReMine says over and over that this or that in fact supports his 'theory'. He says over and over that his 'theory' is "robust", "testable", and "scientific." Readers and accolade-heapers should ask themselves - If this is true, why did not ReMine provide a single test? Why did not ReMine provide some real-life examples of the application of his 'theory'? What he did was lay out - usually in a demeaning way - some aspect of evolution and claim that it actually - magically - supports his 'theory', not evolution! And, more importantly, one should wonder why ReMine's amazing 'theory' can only be read about in his vanity press book? Why has he not written up manuscripts to be critiqued by his fellow scientists? The answer? Creationists prefer writing in a medium wherein they receive only praise from like-minded individuals, such as "John Woodmorappe", not where those that know better would demolish his flimsy, evidence-less claims. This book belongs on the scrap heap of egomaniacal creationist rants.
Rating: 
Summary: Insightful, Outstanding, a must read book for creation
Review: Dr. Remine has done an outstanding job of putting the misleading theory of evolution where it belongs, in the trash. You would think that after 150 years the failing theory would finally be discarded, so why does it keep sticking around? Dr. Remine shows you why in great detail and in a writing style that the laymen can understand. He explains like no other that I have read, what a tautology is and how it is not science. He explains how the illusion of evolution is kept going and how dogmatic evolutionists "jump" from one "mode" of explanation to the next in order to give their critics the slip.....this book will help you to not be given the slip. One of the best parts that I like about this book is the author's extensive use of EVOLUTIONIST QUOTES, there are only two quotes which he uses from creationists. Dr. Remine is highly studied and writes extremely well, he puts evolutionary dogma on the run. He pulls no punches, yet he is not rude. He lets the two opposing camps of evolutionists do all of the bashing. For those evolutionists who admit the problems of the theory, this book is not embarrassing or harmfull. To those dogmatic evolutionists who insist upon the assumption that evolution has, and still is, taking place and build their theories upon this assumption, Dr. Remine has become an eyesore. My hat is off to the Dr., he has done an outstanding job. I have looked for a book of this caliber, with explanitory "meat", and I have found it within the pages of "The Biotic Message". This book is a MUST for anyone dealing or debating evolutionists. With this book in your hand, you will be "armed and dangerous".
Rating: 
Summary: forget "where are the critics," where is the science?
Review: I attended Walter Remine's lecture at my university on this book, and I must say it did little to convince me to read it. As an engineer, I don't know a whole lot about biology/biochemistry or evolutionary theory, but this was a terrible introduction. While he refuted other related theories by claiming they are "unscientific", I found little more science in his so-called "theory."
He "defined" his "theory" as follows: 1) life was designed for survival, 2) life points to only ONE intelligent designer, and 3) that life was designed to resist all other theories of the like (Darwin, Gould, etc.). However, this does not strike me as a fully coherent, rigorous, and falsifiable scientific theory, but rather an amalgamation of simple observations and ides. Part 1 seems to be little more than a basic observation that may somehow lead to a theory than actually part of a theory itself; part 2 is more of the same, and though it may be a correct observation, it is not particularly testable as far as I can tell. Furthermore, part 3 (which I assume is the meat of his "theory") seems more like arrogance than anything scientific. To me, it implies that this "theory" is more or less final (because if it resists all other theories, this theory cannot really be modified), and I don't expect that there could be a final explanation (and this doesn't even explain much) only a 150 years after Darwin's theory (which, I think, was basically the first respected scientific theory on the subject), considering how ancient sciences like physics and astronomy are STILL forming new theories and changing old ones as new data is analyzed.
The subtle arrogance involved in his "theory" seems absurd coming from a person who is actually an electrical engineer, and not a biologist or a biochemist. I do not necessarily disagree with his ideas, I just don't think he has formulated them into coherent enough of a theory to warrant 538 pages on the same subject. After having sat through his lecture, I suggest if you want to learn more about Creation/Evolution Theory, you should start elsewhere.
P.S. he gets one star for having the balls to write so much on such small premise, and one more because he's an engineer. That's it!
Rating:
Summary: Excellent writing, complete resource
Review: I have not made it past the 4th chapter yet and I would already recommend this book to anyone interested in seeing the wholes in evolutionists' statements. A sampling of the chapters I have read thus far include one on the problems concerning evoutionsts' theories for the origin of life and one on their definition of natural selection ("survival of the fittest", which is a tautology - NOTE: this author illustrates the "tautologistic" nature of this phrase more clearly than does DARWIN ON TRIAL). A common theme involves the way in which evolutionists have at their disposal a multitude of theories (mascarading as one theory) from which they can select the one that suits a particular instance. Take any one of these theories and it falls apart - but string them together so as to show only the valid parts of each and it gives the ILLUSION of being a single, cohesive theory. I can't wait to read the rest.
Rating:
Summary: A great contribution to Creationist scientific literature!
Review: The Biotic Message is one book, besides the Bible, that has actually changed my life and my whole outlook on science in general. Even though I haven't read the entire volume, so far, I have been quite impressed with the logic and scientific evidence presented in it thus far. Some major points worth mentioning are the fact that evolutionists do create double standards against creationism by passing off a purely naturalistic, mechanistic view of origins over a supernatural view. I also love the scope of the book where he challenges the theory of evolution by stating that, "Life was designed to look like the work of one designer." Quite obviosly with all the homology in biology, it is easy to assert the notion that all life came from a common ancestor, which evolution teaches. A closer look on the evidence, as presented in this book, shows that a naturalistic account for explaining life's great diversity and similarities is impossible! Homology can actually serve as evidence for a single creator. Dr. ReMine used a good analogy for this: an artist paints many pictures, each one being markedly different but each painting shares some basic similarities. He applies this kind of an analogy to the similarities and differences of living organisms and it is quite effective! I don't have the space or the time to go into great detail, but, if you are willing, and open-minded enough,(this seems hard for some evolutionists) then I would suggest that you give this book an opportunity and a fair hearing. This book, shows that the theory of evolution strikes out on every account. Okay! Don't take my word for it, pick it up and read it. Do you feel up to it? By the way, great job Dr. ReMine! Robert
Rating:
Summary: A great contribution to Creationist scientific literature!
Review: The Biotic Message is one book, besides the Bible, that has actually changed my life and my whole outlook on science in general. Even though I haven't read the entire volume, so far, I have been quite impressed with the logic and scientific evidence presented in it thus far. Some major points worth mentioning are the fact that evolutionists do create double standards against creationism by passing off a purely naturalistic, mechanistic view of origins over a supernatural view. I also love the scope of the book where he challenges the theory of evolution by stating that, "Life was designed to look like the work of one designer." Quite obviosly with all the homology in biology, it is easy to assert the notion that all life came from a common ancestor, which evolution teaches. A closer look on the evidence, as presented in this book, shows that a naturalistic account for explaining life's great diversity and similarities is impossible! Homology can actually serve as evidence for a single creator. Dr. ReMine used a good analogy for this: an artist paints many pictures, each one being markedly different but each painting shares some basic similarities. He applies this kind of an analogy to the similarities and differences of living organisms and it is quite effective! I don't have the space or the time to go into great detail, but, if you are willing, and open-minded enough,(this seems hard for some evolutionists) then I would suggest that you give this book an opportunity and a fair hearing. This book, shows that the theory of evolution strikes out on every account. Okay! Don't take my word for it, pick it up and read it. Do you feel up to it? By the way, great job Dr. ReMine! Robert
Rating:
Summary: A Unique God-Centered Approach to Biology
Review: There are subtle messages in living things, and they point to a Creator, not to organic evolution. The author compiles a great deal of worthwhile information about the function of living things. The book is supported by numerous references to the professional scientific literature. If you are steeped in rationalism and cannot handle a scholarly pro-God viewpoint, then stay away from this book.
Rating:
Summary: Where Are The Critics?
Review: This book deserves every one of it's five stars. This is by far the most comprehensive and best presented introduction to evolutionary theory that I have ever read. Yes, even those who support evolutionary theory would benefit from this volume. This book is also far and away the best critique of evolutionary theory that I have ever read, and I have been reading on the topic for years now. I will not go into specifics, but I will tell you that if you are interested in this subject at all, you need to get this book. Beware! The book is *not* for beginners. This book is by an author who knows what he is talking about and who gets into the details, but it is still well written and easy enough to follow for those with some background in the theory. I'll close by stating that I have experienced many of the tactics which the author exposes in my own discussions with evolutionists. He is right on target, and I can't wait for the next volume by this author. Thank you, Walter James ReMine!
Rating:
Summary: Fairly standard creationist fare
Review: Walter ReMine has presented us with an attractively bound volume that is really little more than a collection of out-of-context quotes, no true message "theory," and little substance. ReMine's poor scholarship is never more evident than when, on page 438, he claims that "there exists no modern book" that "surveys" the field of biogeography "for or against evolution." When I challenged Walter with a fairly extensive list of publications in my personal library on the subject, he declined to comment allegedly on the grounds that I had criticized his overabundance of quoted material and the internally poor construction and layout of the material (he alleges that I misrepresented him, an argument that did not fly in the face of the facts as they were presented during the discussion and archives of which are widely available now at Deja.com). Walter relies on the typical lack of scientific acumen that is common among his targeted readership and overwhelms them with alleged arguments from many facets of science - all designed to fool his readership into believing there is substance to his claims. That this has been effective is demonstrated in some of the reviews we have seen here at Amazon.com thus far, extending from the confusion as to Walter's credentials (he is an engineer, not a scientist and, to my knowledge, does not possess a doctorate) and an apparent challenge - "where are the critics" - with respect to any evolutionary responses to the book. The critics have challenged Walter *directly* in Usenet forums...and Walter has never directly addressed (and usually ignores) specific challenges and efforts to explain his errors to him. This is not scientific or intellectual behavior, but it *is* the behavior of one with an anti-scientific agenda who's been caught with his hand in the proverbial cookie jar. When Walter is confronted by the very people he criticizes, his arguments are found deficient and his defense of them has been nonexistent. Finally, the reason you don't see a lot of evolutionary comment on the book is simple - it's an expensive volume, not scientific at all, and is actually not near as well-known (or avoided) as Walter and his publisher would like you to believe. It's not even close to "the book evolutionists don't want you to read," as he claims. It's more like "the book about which most biological scientists are not even aware." And as a further corollary, creationists should not confuse the lack of a response with an inability to respond. Sometimes self-promoters such as Walter confuse "didn't dare to respond" with "didn't bother." A truly science-minded person is advised to take a pass on this book.
|
