Intelligent Design

Another great article on Lew Rockwell dot com.

Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design
by Charley Reese

I am an agnostic when it comes to explaining the origin of life. I don’t believe yet in evolution, creationism or intelligent design. I can see flaws in all three. I just simply don’t know and frankly don’t think it matters whether we know or not.

My main conflict with the evolutionists is that they wish to assert their theory as fact and to employ government power to ban discussion of creationism and intelligent design on the grounds that they are unscientific or, worse from their point of view, religious. I am against banning any idea, theory, speculation or body of guesses. Human history shows us to be far too error-prone to go around eliminating dissent by majority vote of one of the more ignorant classes in our society, namely politicians.

Science has been itching to replace religion in Western culture for some time. You can see for yourself how science assumes the characteristics of religion. There is the priesthood (scientists, or at least those who call themselves scientists) and laity, which is the rest of us. Theory becomes dogma. Dissenters are persecuted. The high priests of science want the government not only to fund them, but to enforce their dogmas with the power of the law.

I believe in the separation of church and state. I also believe in the separation of science and state. In fact, I believe in the separation of practically all aspects of life from the state, which should basically tote the mail and guard the coast.

Read More ›

There are people who believe that because Darwin provided a theoretical basis that humans and animals have a common ancestor it becomes a rationale for treating humans more like animals. Thus we get things like Nazi Germany and the holocaust. I suppose that’s one way of looking at it. Another equally valid way of looking at it is that common ancestry becomes a rationale for treating animals more like humans. Thus we get things like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. It’s all a matter of how you choose to look at it. It’s really more a reflection on your own soul which way you choose to see it. Good people do good things. Evil people do evil things. Read More ›

This just in from a contact at Campus Crusade: Three documentaries on DVD, perfect for an ID collection, are now available for just $29.95 -– about $10 per DVD: Campuscrusade.com/8110E The three documentaries are: The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel Unlocking the Mystery of Life The Privileged Planet The Privileged Planet was, of course, co-written by Guillermo Gonzalez, Ph.D. Ben Stein’s Expelled asserts that Dr. Gonzalez was denied tenure for challenging Darwinian Orthodoxy. Perhaps someone you know would enjoy seeing what is so controversial about Gonzalez’ ideas in particular and Intelligent Design, in general. The DVDs present solid scientific concepts in language the layman or laywoman can understand, with state of the art, memorable graphics.

Recently, while speaking in southern California, I heard from a nationally-recognized academic expert on the ID / evolution debate that he refused to see Expelled, at least in its current theatrical release. “I don’t think I want to give any money to those guys,” he said dismissively. That’s OK — money is money, and the 9 or so bucks he might have spent on Expelled would show up in the box office totals — but at least this person hasn’t yet delivered himself publicly of opinions about the movie. No such niceties for ID critic John Derbyshire, who doesn’t actually need to see a movie before opining about it, as David Berlinski points out at National Review Online.

The same day I first watched “Expelled” in theaters, I also watched the movie “21”. The movie “21” is based on the true story of MIT students who made a fortune in Las Vegas casinos through the use of mathematics.

The real story behind the movie began with an associate of Claude Shannon by the name of Dr. Edward O. Thorp of MIT. In the Early 60’s, Thorp published a landmark mathematical treatise on how to beat casinos. His research was so successful that Las Vegas casinos shut down many of their card tables for an entire year until they could devise counter measures to impede Thorp’s mathematics.

Thorp is arguably the greatest gambler of all time. He extended his gambling science to the stock market and made a fortune. His net worth is in the fractional to low billions. He is credited with some independent discoveries which were the foundation to the Black-Scholes-Merton equation relating heat transfer thermodynamics to stock option pricing. The equation won the Nobel prize and was the subject of the documentary: The Trillion Dollar Bet.

Thorp would probably be even richer today if Rudy Gulliani had not falsely implicated him in the racketeering scandal involving Michael Milken. Thorp, by the way, keeps a dartboard with Gulliani’s picture on it… 🙂

The relevance of Thorp’s math to Darwinism is that Thorp was a pioneer of risk management (which he used to create the world’s first hedge fund). In managing a hedge fund or managing the wagers in casinos, one is confronted with the mathematically defined problem of Gambler’s Ruin. The science of risk management allows a risk manager or a skilled gambler to defend against the perils gamblers ruin. Unfortunately for Darwinism, natural selection has little defense against the perils of gambler’s ruin.
Read More ›

Youtube has a series of monotonous lectures by Barbara Forrest. They call Barbara the woman creationists don’t want you to listen to. Dear Barbara, after listening to you, I know who is really deceiving people, and who is really afraid (or is it paranoid?), and it is not those who support ID. ID is about following the evidence where it leads. It is not about America, or the US Constitution or undermining the rest of science. There is no one ready to steal away your power and supress your rights. ID is a theory that doesn’t automatically Expell evidence for intelligent causation, but considers it along side other explanations for physical phenomena. If Barbara is the best they offer, there is not much on offer. Read More ›

Word from the conference organizers is that many more papers were submitted to this conference than could possibly be accepted. “A very large number of excellent papers was submitted,” they write, “of which we were only able to accept a fraction.” GOD, NATURE AND DESIGN Historical and Contemporary Perspectives St Anne’s College, Oxford July 10th – 13th 2008 Invited (plenary) speakers include Michael Ruse, Richard Swinburne, Ron Numbers, John Hedley Brooke, Stephen Snobelen, and Holmes Rolston III (their bios are here). The line-up of contributed papers is remarkable for its depth and diversity. More papers will be added to this list as the acceptances come in. Y’all better book your place at the conference, like, now.

Elliott Sober’s new book, Evidence and Evolution: The Logic Behind the Science (Cambridge University Press, 2008, 392 pp.) is now out, and worth your attention. A wide range of topics often discussed here — such as the theory of universal common descent (pro and con), the explanatory merits (or lack thereof) of natural selection, arguments for evolution based on biological imperfection, the logical structure of inferences to intelligent design — receive careful analytical attention from Sober. Cambridge provides enough of a sample here to whet your appetite, I think. Here’s a non-ironic blessing: May God grant us thoughtful critics. Sober has long been one such critic of ID, not to mention of much evolutionary reasoning, and I welcome this book Read More ›

Judge Jones (the former liquor control board director famous for his involvement with Frog Beer) ruled in 2005 that it was unconstitutional for teachers in the Dover school district to question Darwinism. Jones viewed himself as the person who would settle the question of Darwinism for all time an eternity. He even went on the talk show circuit boasting of his brilliant cut-and-paste of ACLU opinions.

Thankfully Jones does not speak for all of the United States, and his cut-and-paste ruling apparently has not been able to stifle the first amendment rights of students in other states.

Casey Luskin reports in Florida House and Louisiana Senate Pass Evolution Academic Freedom Bills.

Academic Freedom bills have now passed both the Florida House of Representatives and the Louisiana State Senate. The bills protect the rights of teachers to teach controversial scientific theories objectively, where scientific criticisms of scientific theories (including evolution) can be raised as well as the scientific strengths. The Darwinists in those states do not like this. First Florida Darwinists called academic freedom “smelly crap.” Then Louisiana Darwinists called academic freedom protections a “creationist attack” that is “Just Dumb.” Most recently Florida Darwinists used the “enlightened British will laugh at us argument” to oppose academic freedom. All I can say is, you heard it here first: “For the Darwinists who oppose the bill, this battle is about falsely appealing to people’s emotions and fears in order to suppress the teaching of scientific information that challenges evolution.”

Read More ›

This just published at the STANFORD REVIEW: The Impact of Darwinism By Tristan Abbey With the premiere of Ben Stein’s new movie, Expelled, many people are pondering the long-term impact of Darwinism on society. We touched base with two experts on the subject. Arguing that Darwinism has had a largely positive impact on society is Michael Ruse, the Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy at Florida State University. Arguing that Darwinism has had a largely negative impact on society is Richard Weikart, Professor of History at California State University, Stanislaus. . . . ACCORDING TO WEIKART: “[I]n the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries most leading Darwinists, including Darwin, tended to stress human inequality more than equality, in part because evolution Read More ›

I went down to the demonstration to get my fair share of abuse — The Rolling Stones, “You Can’t Always Get Want You Want” But you might just get what you need, if you’ve got a burning question or two about the Expelled controversies. Darwin-to-Hitler, doesn’t Sternberg still have his Smithsonian position, the Pepperdine students were extras, the cell animation is plagiarized, Dawkins and P.Z. Myers and all the rest were tricked into granting interviews, Darwin’s Descent of Man was quote-mined, why didn’t Ben Stein just use Google Maps to find the Discovery Institute, ID is religious ’cause Expelled admits it, Yoko Ono is suing…whatevah. Bring Your Questions for Profs. John Bloom, Mike Keas and Paul Nelson Monday, April 28 Read More ›

In a prior post EJ wrote:  “I think natural intelligences are to be preferred above supernatural intelligences in design detection, for the simple reason that we have experience with the former, but not the latter.” 

I replied:  “Says who? You are repeating Hume’s error of circular reasoning. “Miracles do not happen because they are counter to universal experience.”  In other words, “miracles do not happen because miracles do not happen.”  That may satisfy you and Hume.  Those who would like to have their conclusions demonstrated rather than assumed might not be as impressed.” 

Then evo_materialist wrote:  “BarryA, you may have experience with miracles.  Alas, I do not, and neither has anybody I know in a way that’s not better explained naturally.” 

Pace evo’s comment, I never said I personally have had experience with miracles.  My comment is a matter of the application of logic to EJ’s (and Hume’s before him) position.  In other words, my point is that Hume’s position fails on logical grounds, not because my experience is different from his.   

Hume (and EJ and Evo) asserts a univeral principle of natural law, which Karl Popper calls ‘the principle of causality.’

This is what Karl Popper says about this principle in The Logic of Scientific Discovery (which, as far as I know, is the only scientific text with the force of law in the United States): 

Read More ›

You know: teach the controversy, and all that. Meaning — after you watch this clip from bloggingheadstv — he’s going to come in for heavy criticism in the comments. Horgan has always kept his own counsel, which makes him interesting to read (one is bound to find something provocative — I remember thinking that his book The End of Science was wrong wrong wrong, but it made me reflect deeply about the nature of scientific inquiry) and to watch. In the same clip, George Johnson wonders about the “niche” occupied by non-religious critics of evolutionary theory. Why do such people exist?

Nancy Pearcey will be addressing After Expelled, on NewsTalk 1260 WFTW 9:30 AM EST Friday April 25th, 2008 Then on May 5th Events at the Mattie Kelly Fine & Performing Arts Center Okaloosa-Walton College Mattie Kelly Fine & Performing Arts Center 100 College Boulevard, Niceville, FL 32578

I just got back from a couple of weeks in Israel, where I visited the ruins of the ancient city of Capernaum on the shores of the Sea of Galilee and saw this stone: An “expert” at the site insisted that this stone bears the marks of a 1st century Jewish stone carver.  “But,” I asked him, “as a scientist are you not bound by the strictures of methodological naturalism?  Your explanation for the markings is a classic example of the ‘stone carver of the gaps’ fallacy, and you should be ashamed of yourself.  The methods of science demand that we favor a naturalistic explanation for the markings on this stone, and it seems to me that ‘weathering’ is the best Read More ›