Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

“Signs of Intelligence?” — The Weekly Standard


Signs of Intelligence?
What the neo-Darwinists don’t understand about theories of Intelligent Design

by Isaac Constantine


. . . A recent editorial in the New York Times bemoans the legislative progress of the “dangerous” brood of creationists, barely disguised in the pseudo-scientific trappings of “intelligent design.” The editors charge the movement, and anyone who questions Darwin on the basis of “supernatural explanations,” with breaking the presumably unspoken code of positing forces beyond “the usual domain of science.” The editor’s at the Times don’t seem concerned that many physicists, in light of the curious ability of subatomic particles to occupy infinite locations at once (one of those quirks in nature resistant to “natural” explanation), propose a “Many Worlds hypothesis” where people live infinite lives in infinite parallel universes–each hidden from each other–to account for every possible quantum outcome. . .

"Many physicists" espouse a many-worlds interpretation? Not hardly. For all but a vanishingly small minority, the many-worlds interpretation (in quantum mechanics, at least) isn't deemed to pass the giggle test. It isn't taken any more seriously by philosophers of physics, either. Anthony Perez-Miller
I made this very same argument recently on the ARN forum. See the following link: http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/f/13/t/002396/p/1.html? morpheusfaith

Leave a Reply