[General] Scholarly Book Citations: Am I Sourcing Correctly?

[Joshptrsn6]

Joshua --------
April 28, 2012
English 101
Dr. Peter ---------

Journal 12: Young and Taner's “Why Intelligent Design Fails”

​

Matt Young and Taner Edis state in their book “Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism” that“Intelligent Design is the successor to old-fashioned creationism .. . “ (Young and Edis 1). Many individuals today disregard the theory of evolution; the only currently plausible explanation for the origin of species. Intelligent Design (ID) participants label the ID as a theory instead of a hypothesis in order to convey authority. The ID hypothesis is widely rejected through reviews by scientific peers.A scientific theory must be falsifiable and the attempt to falsify religious beliefs is unethical. No observations or experiments can prove, or disprove, the existence of god; so, in all fairness, ID is not a theory because it does not include, and even excludes, numerous legitimate forms of scientific data and theories. The god cannot be falsified because, as creationists claim, belief in god is based on personal faith. It is okay if an individual has a faith based belief system, but science is not faith based, quite the opposite. Scientific observations are based on unaltered observations of the natural world. Religion in any form is non scientific because it cannot be proven as a natural law, principle, or theory. Science does not discourtesy religion, it simply understands that no religion can be tested for scientific validity, and every religion is viewed as equally non scientific. In “A few states, such as Arkansas in1981 . . . ” (3), [many] “Creationists campaigned to force young earth creationism into the biology classroom, but their belief in a young earth, in particular, was too obviously religious” (Young and Edis 3).

The ID inference is the assumption that an ordered complexity was purposefully created by a deity. This assumption is based on the need to place meaning in ordered complexities simply because they are “so complex”. ID supporters label modern science as dogmatic; The practice of scientific falsifiability, peer reviews, and observations that are free of any conceivable bias prove the label to be mendacious.“Pertinently, its proponents are sometimes coy about the identity of their designer” (Yourg and Edis 2). Portraying ID as a uniform science by refusing to openly acknowledge that the hypothesis assumes the existence of a deity is ludicrous, but it explains how ID made it into the classroom. In uniformitarianism, there are no assumption-based conclusions, only speculations, hypotheses, and theories. ID supporters have formed a specifically religion based hypothesis, while trying to mask it as a hard scientific theory by allowing “ . . . evolutionary theory . . . ” to be accepted as “. . . descent with modification” (Young and Edis 2).

Works Cited​

Young, Matt, and Taner Edis. “Why Intelligent Design Fails : A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism”. New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 2004. Web.Ebrary. 28 May 2012.

 

[Tdol]

(Young and Edis 1)- What does the number refer to?

“A few states, such as Arkansas in1981” (3)- What does this one refer to? If you have added the word many, you could indicate that with square brackets: [many] and use ...

​

 

[Joshptrsn6]

(Young and Edis 1) The number refers to the page.

I am following MLA formatting, or at least trying to... Square brackets are a good idea, but what does ... mean?

Thanks for your insight.

 

[Tdol]

I don't know if you have broken the text or if you're quoting directly. You can use an ellipsis to show that some text is missing from the original in your quote.

The second author's name should be written first name + last name. Why are you using "Title" rather than Title? Also, shouldn't you just give the city of publication, rather than city, state and country?

This page is fairly easy to follow:
Purdue OWL: MLA Formatting and Style Guide

 

[Joshptrsn6]

Okay, that all makes perfect sense... except for the second author's first + last name, don't I already have his first + last?

 

[Tdol]

If you do, then there shouldn't be a comma between them: Edis Taner

 

[Tdol]

This suggests that it should be Taner Edis.Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism, (081353433X), Taner Edis, Textbooks - Barnes & Noble

So

Young, Matt, and Taner Edis