Darwinism Intelligent Design News

Darwinism: Falsehood doesn’t matter when truth doesn’t

Spread the love
File:Darwin Fish 01.svg
darwinfish/@reaper

Last night, it as noted that macroevolution was not a clear concept back in 1980 and enough was known by 2009 to fell Darwin’s “tree of life.” But it makes no difference. The circus rolls on around and around in a circle, textbooks reflect a vanished world of certainties, dissenters are silenced and no one notices or can afford to.

A friend wrote to point out that a number of areas in science are like that now. Everyone in the know knows there are serious problems but top people won’t discuss them for fear of “bringing out the yahoos.” In the real world, of course, yahoos come to power because Top People cannot address problems. Most people don’t want that, but they don’t choose to risk anything to prevent it when the Top People were hopeless anyway.

All this said, a friend of Uncommon Descent writes to point out that Darwinians believe that our brains were shaped for fitness, not truth. They probably feel no strong drive to accommodate their theory with fact; indeed, Darwin’s followers are quite content with a science that does nothing but attempt to cherrypick or, increasingly, manufacture demonstrations of their theory.

They ask for no more and no more will they ever get. What should the rest of us do?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

4 Replies to “Darwinism: Falsehood doesn’t matter when truth doesn’t

  1. 1
    Axel says:

    One of the first words my eyes alighted upon, reading the above brief article, O’Leary, was the word, ‘Yahoo’; and it really took me by surprise, as, though used metaphorically here, I’d turned to this thread, to remark that Jonathon Swift would have been hard put to satirize the already farcical antics of our evolutionist friends!

  2. 2
    Barb says:

    Certain students of philosophy have developed the view that ultimate truth is not within the reach of mankind. In fact, Swedish author Alf Ahlberg wrote: “Many philosophical questions are of such a nature that it is not possible to give a definite answer to them.”

    “Truth” has been defined as “the body of real things, events, and facts.” (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary) Truth corresponds to reality–not what we want reality to be, but what reality actually is. It signifies what is right and genuine. Do PhD-level scientists not understand this simple definition?

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    Barb as to:

    “Certain students of philosophy have developed the view that ultimate truth is not within the reach of mankind,,,”

    But alas, most everyone seems to expend an extraordinary amount of time looking for it. To varying degrees everyone looks for truth. A few people back in the 60’s, such as the Beatles, went so far as to travel to distant lands seeking gurus in their quest to find “Truth”. People are happy when they discover a new truth into the mysteries of life. People who have deep insights into the truth of how things actually work are considered wise. In the bible Jesus says “You will know the truth and the truth will set you free.” He also states:

    John 18:37-38
    ,,,Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.
    “What is truth?” Pilate asked. With this he went out again to the Jews and said, “I find no basis for a charge against him.

    The preceding verse happens, as far as I know, to be the verse on the oldest fragment of the New Testament discovered thus far:

    The Oldest Known Fragment Of The New Testament – Serendipitous Gospel – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyfR0AsRaX4

    In the following video, Professor Steve Fuller comments on the insatiable urge in science to seek ‘truth’:

    In Cambridge, Professor Steve Fuller discusses intelligent design – Video
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....nd-others/
    At 17:34 minute mark of the video, Dr. Steve Fuller states:
    “So you think of physics in search of a “Grand Unified Theory of Everything”, Why should we even think there is such a thing? Why should we think there is some ultimate level of resolution? Right? It is part, it is a consequence of believing in some kind of design. Right? And there is some sense in which that however mulrifarious and diverse the phenomena of nature are, they are ultimately unified by the minimal set of laws and principles possible. In so far as science continues to operate with that assumption, there is a presupposition of design that is motivating the scientific process. Because it would be perfectly easy,, to stop the pursuit of science at much lower levels. You know understand a certain range of phenomena in a way that is appropiate to deal with that phenomena and just stop there and not go any deeper or any farther.”,,, You see, there is sense in which there is design at the ultimate level, the ultimate teleology you might say, which provides the ultimate closure,,”

    But alas, materialists/atheists, besides being in denial of ‘design thinking’ that is hard wired into them,,,

    Design Thinking Is Hardwired in the Human Brain. How Come? – October 17, 2012
    Excerpt: “Even Professional Scientists Are Compelled to See Purpose in Nature, Psychologists Find.” The article describes a test by Boston University’s psychology department, in which researchers found that “despite years of scientific training, even professional chemists, geologists, and physicists from major universities such as Harvard, MIT, and Yale cannot escape a deep-seated belief that natural phenomena exist for a purpose” ,,,
    Most interesting, though, are the questions begged by this research. One is whether it is even possible to purge teleology from explanation.
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....65381.html

    , are forever without that ‘ultimate closure’ that Professor Fuller spoke about:

    Comprehensibility of the world – niwrad
    Excerpt: ,,,Bottom line: without an absolute Truth, (there would be) no logic, no mathematics, no beings, no knowledge by beings, no science, no comprehensibility of the world whatsoever.
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....the-world/

    But even though in the atheistic worldview there is no ultimate truth to be found (save for the fact that there is no ultimate truth to be found 🙂 ),,, They still go about their lives as if ultimate truth exists. But what does ‘the truth’ even look like to an atheist who holds a self-defeating naturalistic worldview where every possibility and its countervailing antecedent can be true?

    (Multiverse) Carroll would retire falsifiability as a science idea.
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-489142

    I strongly suggest watching Dr. Craig’s following short video to get a full feel for just how insane the metaphysical naturalist’s position actually is.

    Is Metaphysical Naturalism Viable? – William Lane Craig – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzS_CQnmoLQ

    i.e. what does it REALLY mean for an atheist to ‘seek truth’? Well as Professor Fuller pointed out, a lot of atheists would claim, such as Hawking, that ‘seeking truth’ would involve seeking the hypothetical mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’. But, as Godel proved, and as Hawking himself admitted and then subsequently forgot, truth cannot be grounded within a mathematical ‘Theory Of Everything’ since any mathematics that is specific enough to have counting numbers within it cannot contain ‘the Truth’ within itself but is dependent on a outside cause in order to derive its truthfulness:

    Kurt Gödel – Incompleteness Theorem – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/8462821

    “Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine.”
    – Kurt Gödel

    The nature and significance of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems – Princeton – 2006
    Excerpt: ,,Stephen Hawking and Freeman Dyson, among others, have come to the conclusion that Gödel’s theorem implies that there can’t be a Theory of Everything.,,
    http://math.stanford.edu/~fefe.....el-IAS.pdf

    Hawking also, besides forgetting the importance of the incompleteness theorem, stated this huge non-sequitur in his book, ‘The Grand Design’:

    “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.The universe didn’t need a God to begin; it was quite capable of launching its existence on its own,”
    Stephen Hawking
    http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_.....wking.html

  4. 4
    bornagain77 says:

    Yet ‘laws’ are merely descriptions that have never caused anything:

    The Laws of Nature (Have Never ‘Caused’ Anything) by C.S. Lewis – doodle video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_20yiBQAIlk

    GORDON: Hawking’s irrational arguments – Oct. 2010
    Excerpt: This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world,,,
    Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency – a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what “breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.” Anything else invokes random miracles as an explanatory principle and spells the end of scientific rationality.,,,
    Universes do not “spontaneously create” on the basis of abstract mathematical descriptions, nor does the fantasy of a limitless multiverse trump the explanatory power of transcendent intelligent design. What Mr. Hawking’s contrary assertions show is that mathematical savants can sometimes be metaphysical simpletons. Caveat emptor.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....arguments/

    Well since ‘ultimate truth’ cannot grounded in law are in math, let’s go back to Christ’s claim:

    John 14:6
    Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

    And ‘If’ we allow that ‘God can play the role of a person’, (for who could deny Him that possibility “IF” He exists), as even the author of the incompleteness theorem himself allowed God that possibility,,

    The God of the Mathematicians – Goldman
    Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.”
    – Kurt Gödel – (Gödel is considered one of the greatest logicians who ever existed)
    http://www.firstthings.com/art.....ematicians

    ,, ‘if’ we allow the possibility that ‘God can play the role of a person’, (and how could a person who believes in infinite multiverses deny at least that possibility?), ‘if’ we allow that possibility then we find a very credible reconciliation between the bounded, finite, world of the 4-D space-time of General Relativity and the infinite Theistic world of Quantum Mechanics. A very credible reconciliation that does not wind up in the ‘anything goes’ epistemological pit of logical absurdities such as string theory, m-theory, random multiverses, and etc.. etc.. does,,,

    The Center Of The Universe Is Life – General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy and The Shroud Of Turin – video
    http://vimeo.com/34084462

    ,,,in fact, unlike all these outlandish multiverse scenarios which have no empirical support (and which undermine our ability to rationally practice science in the first place), we find a reconciliation between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics that has a surprising amount of empirical support. For instance, it is now shown that the process in which the image was formed on the Shroud of Turin had to be a ‘quantum process’, not a classical process:

    The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete values – Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio – 2008
    Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the ‘quantum’ is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril.
    http://cab.unime.it/journals/i.....802004/271

    “It is not a continuum or spherical-front radiation that made the image, as visible or UV light. It is not the X-ray radiation that obeys the one over R squared law that we are so accustomed to in medicine. It is more unique. It is suggested that the image was formed when a high-energy particle struck the fiber and released radiation within the fiber at a speed greater that the local speed of light. Since the fiber acts as a light pipe, this energy moved out through the fiber until it encountered an optical discontinuity, then it slowed to the local speed of light and dispersed. The fact that the pixels don’t fluoresce suggests that the conversion to their now brittle dehydrated state occurred instantly and completely so no partial products remain to be activated by the ultraviolet light. This suggests a quantum event where a finite amount of energy transferred abruptly. The fact that there are images front and back suggests the radiating particles were released along the gravity vector. The radiation pressure may also help explain why the blood was “lifted cleanly” from the body as it transformed to a resurrected state.”
    Kevin Moran, optical engineer

    Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural – December 2011
    Excerpt: After years of work trying to replicate the colouring on the shroud, a similar image has been created by the scientists.
    However, they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax.
    Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic.
    “The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin,” they said.
    And in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the Enea report spells it out: “This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/n.....79512.html

    In fact, of special interest to reconciling General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, there is this interesting anomaly on the shroud:

    THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. – Isabel Piczek – Particle Physicist
    Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox.
    http://shroud3d.com/findings/i.....-formation

    Particle Radiation from the Body – July 2012 – M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind
    Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images.
    http://www.academicjournals.or.....onacci.pdf

    Verse and Music;

    Colossians 1:15-20
    The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

    Lucie Silvas – Nothing Else Matters
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QohUdrgbD2k

Leave a Reply