Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Everything we need to know about airplanes can be explained without reference to programmers

arroba Email

File:A small cup of coffee.JPG And everything we know about computers can be explained without reference to programmers.

Berra’s blunder, cubed, is the new Big Idea. And yes, they mean it.

From a Duke University media release:

The evolution of Earth’s species occurred on a timescale far too large for humans to witness,” said Bejan. “But the evolution of our use of technology and airplanes to transport people and goods has taken place in little more than a single lifetime, making it visible to those who look. Evolution is a universal phenomenon encompassing technology, river basins and animal design alike, and it is rooted in physics as the constructal law.

The supposed law (and the blunder) are unpacked at Evolution News & Views, in “Good Grief. No, Airplanes Don’t “Evolve” by Natural Law.”

First of all, what’s the constructal law? Lewis writes, “In 1996, Bejan developed a rule, known as the constructal law, which states that ‘for any finite flow system to persist, that is, be alive, it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier and easier access to its currents.'” This is absurd; many things persist but are not alive — for example, ocean currents or tides. And in Darwinian theory, nothing “must evolve” by any rule or law: many organisms simply go extinct or never change (e.g., living fossils). The requirements of powered flight are incapable, in themselves, of forcing mindless laws to conjure up a wing or avian lung. The “constructal law” is, therefore, nothing more than a mental imposition on nature that allows Bejan to salvage mindless Darwinism by making it appear law-driven.

In any event, talk about reductionism! Now, they have made technology, river basins and animal body plans all subsets of evolution, and evolution, they say, belongs in the physics department. Did it never occur to these three engineers (including one from Boeing) that airplanes are intelligently designed?

No. Because the new Big Idea is that the mind is not real so there is no such thing as intelligence or design in any conventional sense.

Most don’t quite like to spell it out, but that is what they mean. These engineers are simply going with the flow.

Note: Berra used for successive models of the Corvette to illustrate descent with modification. Which was fine, except that it ignored the automotive engineer and his test bench. Except, that is now seen as a feature, not a bug.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

“Good Grief. No, Airplanes Don’t “Evolve” by Natural Law.”
The author seems clueless about natural laws, or science generally. Where exactly was "natural law" broken (which one) or violated or done away with or put aside... during design and construction of airplanes or of anything else? Wouldn't have that been major news that "natural laws" were broken during such activities such as designing airplanes, writing, talking etc? That kind of uninformed writing does more damage (as an example of utter idiocy among some ID "supporters") to otherwise worthy scientific hypothesis of Intelligent Design than anything Darwinist can say or do. nightlight
sigh leodp
The airplane obviously evolved from the tricycle. No magic engineer in the sky needed. Mung
If one is going to argue that the "Blind Watchmaker" builds actual Rolex & Omega watches, one has to accept ID in Nature at least. The future debate will be Natural ID vs Unnatural ID. The "Appearance of Design" crowd will be dustbinned. ppolish
Is it April 1st?? They've really gone off the reservation this time. I'd be positively embarrassed that such an "argument" is being presented with a straight face! OldArmy94

Leave a Reply