Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

BioLogos contributor blasts Christian Darwinists’ treatment of Steve Meyer’s Signature in the Cell

arroba Email

In “Signature in the BioLogos” (June 28, 2011) at his The Hump of the Camel blog, retired British doctor and BioLogos contributor Jon Garvey blasts the Darwinthink treatment of Steve Meyer’s Signature in the Cell (Harper One, 2009):

What struck me in all this was that every single contribution contained at least some degree of ad hominem attack, and most included dire warnings about the damage the book threatened to science, religion, society or all three. That, combined with the protests of many that the BioLogos articles were misreprepresenting Meyer’s arguments, made a good case for assessing it carefully, my reading informed by 18 months of confutation rather than vice versa. 

Briefly, reading the book made it absolutely clear to me that indeed Meyer had been misrepresented, and without any real excuse since Meyer is a good writer and makes his case clearly (and it has to be said, a lot more even-handedly than his opponents).


Francisco Ayala’s review became notorious because it was quickly evident that he had not read the book, or if, as he later claimed, he had read it, that he had very poor powers of comprehension. He wrongly quotes the title, he wrongly represents its argument as ID being just an alternative to chance, he wrongly applies it to evolution rather than Origin of Life and he ends with a theologically naive criticism of ID generally on the grounds that God could not be responsible for so many bad things in nature. Meyer is unqualified to write on science, but Ayala is, it seems, qualified to write on theology. When these observations were made by Meyer in his response, Ayala had recourse to the index of the book to justify his (quite clearly erroneous) assessment. 

So the doctor joins those who think that Templeton Prize-winner Ayala (2010) noviewed the book. Even better, signing off on all that:

My personal conclusion from all this is that, since I regard strong methodlogical naturalism to be rationally and philosophically untenable, and since I hold strong theological naturalism to be theologically naive as well as unbiblical, I cannot commit myself to the BioLogos viewpoint, even as a theistic evolutionist. Darwin is not that sacred to me. 

Betting here is he won’t be asked to commit to the “BioLogos viewpoint” for much longer. But why worry.As Frank Beckwith said, extricating himself from a vulgar attack by non-theist Darwinists, “Or we can be philosophers.”

Follow UD News at Twitter!

As to Origin Of Life research, it seems a Atheist has put up $50,000 for anyone who can figure out how life started. Scientist-Politician-Atheist Offers Own Money For Origin of Life Prize http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/06/scientist-politician-atheist-off.html?ref=hp Quote of note: 'the award's site notes that "submissions involving the supernatural or that violate physical laws will not be considered." ' In the article, They also call into question the $1,000,000 dollar prize that is already on the table,,, The Origin-of-Life Prize ® Excerpt: The one-time Prize will be paid to the winner(s) as a twenty-year annuity in hopes of discouraging theorists' immediate retirement from productive careers. The annuity consists of $50,000.00 (U.S.) per year for twenty consecutive years, totaling one million dollars in payments. http://lifeorigin.org/ ,,, yet the 1,000,000 dollar prize is 'monitored',,, The ability of the Foundation to underwrite these payments and to administer the Project is monitored by the well-known accounting firm of Young, Brophy & Duncan, PC, Certified Public Accountants. ,,,, as a sidenote,,, I'm fairly certain that $1,000,000 is utter chicken fee to the money the U.S. taxpayer has given to actual research in this area. ,,, Of course the Origin of Life problem is the same exact problem that faces neo-Darwinian evolution,,,, 'Exactly how does one account for the generation of highly complex functional information by purely material processes without recourse to a Mind'??? ,,,And of course 'physical law', particularly the second law, steadfastly prevents as such! But alas, it seems apparent that many atheists would rather deny the obvious than accept God. John 1 1-3 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. The Word - Sara Groves - music video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ofE-GZ8zTU ================= Why the Quantum? It from Bit? A Participatory Universe? Excerpt: In conclusion, it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Thence the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: "In the beginning was the Word." Anton Zeilinger - a leading expert in quantum teleportation: http://www.metanexus.net/Magazine/ArticleDetail/tabid/68/id/8638/Default.aspx bornagain77
Honesty and openness at Biologos? Surely (shirley) the four horsemen of Revelations cannot be far behind... Joseph
of note: new video Stephen Meyer Gives a Primer on Debate Over Intelligent Design and Evolution - video http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/07/stephen_meyer_gives_a_primer_o048071.html bornagain77

Leave a Reply