Double Helix Nebula

_{William Dembski

March 16, 2006

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n0603/15doublehelix

Comments

dougmoran: I did say that one "might" conclude that there are similarities in the forces (electromagnetic) that hold the one and the other together. But I tend toward your opinion that the scale suggests that even this connection is far-fetched. My point was that even if it is granted that the similarity in structures is due to a similarity in forces, this has almost nothing to do with what makes DNA the wonder molecule that it is---which is what I kind of sensed Dr. Morris was suggesting. As I also stated: I do admire the hanidwork. It is interesting to see these parallel structures at such outlandishly large differences in scale.PaV_{March 20, 2006
March
03
Mar
20
20
2006
11:22 AM
11
11
22
AM
PDT}

I bet Dr. Morris got a stern warning from the thought police at the National Center for ~~Selling Evolution~~Science Education that the language he used in his description of the nebula - DNA and "high degree of order" - was too reminiscent of design and worse, he failed to use the word "evolution" even one time. The good Dr. Morris, understandably wishing to avoid a nasty sternberging from the thought police, hastily published a retraction on a well known Intelligent Design "Creationism" blog. I mean what astronomer in their right mind wants to be gonzalezed by the Darwinistas or worse be davisoned into early retirement?
DaveScot_{March 18, 2006
March
03
Mar
18
18
2006
09:52 PM
9
09
52
PM
PDT}

PaV - I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I doubt the forces holding DNA together are related to the forces holding this monstrosity together. I doubt it's even being held together - but instead is being moved by dynamic harmonic oscilations in magnetic and/or gravitational fields. But I don't really know anything except that it is too many orders of magnitude larger than DNA to have a likely connection. This is a fascinating scientific discovery that has nothing whatsoever to do with DNA (in my opinion) but is fascinating nonetheless. Dr. Morris and others should be pleased the discovery is getting so much attention, including that of Dr. Dembski who's post was so neutral that it couldn't possible be interpreted as an attempt to tie it to ID in any way other than common interest in all things scientific. At least that's the way I read it.dougmoran_{March 18, 2006
March
03
Mar
18
18
2006
07:33 PM
7
07
33
PM
PDT}

One more thing if I may... Dr. Morris wrote: "The nebula...is a remarkable example of something that can be accomodated by the scientific enterprise as readily as we can account for hurricanes....[It] can be well explained in terms of existing and well-supported scientific hypotheses about the Galaxy and its contents." In other words, what Dr. Morris has really demonstrated here is his complete ignorance of the scientific theory of Intelligent Design. The unspoken assumption of Dr. Morris' statement is that ID is "God did it supernaturally". If he understood ID, Dr. Morris would understand that his theory to explain the structure of the nebula by strong magnetic fields surrounding the black hole at the center of the galaxy is perfectly acceptable to ID theorists. ID is about the *detection* of Intelligent Design. Ice crystals are complex, but the design is contingent upon the physical properties of water at freezing temperatures. The nebula is contingent on the physical properties of the nebular cloud in the presence of a strong magnetic field. Now, if we see an igloo constructed from blocks of ice, we are able to detect Intelligent Design of the igloo. We see no parallelly independent pattern associated with the Double-Helix Nebula, therefore we do not suspect Intelligent Design of the Nebula or anything associated with the Nebula. By not understanding ID in the first place, Dr. Morris is the maker of his own upset by comparing the Nebula to a structure--the microbiological double-helix--which DOES in fact display a type of an independent pattern--that an information storage and retrieval system--which is universally recognized as evidence of Intelligent Design.Red Reader_{March 18, 2006
March
03
Mar
18
18
2006
10:47 AM
10
10
47
AM
PDT}

Certainly the giant nebula doesn't code for proteins. If there is a parallel between the nebula and DNA, it is, obviously, its doubly-helical structure. The conclusion one might make from the similarity of structures is that the forces that hold the DNA together and the forces that hold the nebula together are similar. One can't go much further than that. But the good professor seems to imply that since the "evoluton" of the physical structure of something that resembles DNA can be explained solely on the basis of physical laws, that this applies equally to DNA as well. I don't see how the one notion follows from the other. But I do admire the handiwork.PaV_{March 18, 2006
March
03
Mar
18
18
2006
07:00 AM
7
07
00
AM
PDT}

I understand the purpose of Dr. D's post is to observe the use of the word "double-helix" to describe the structure of a newly discovered nebula. The connection to ID is that the microbiological double-helix is a prototypical example of Intelligent Design. Unfortunately, the Darwin camp considers DNA the Holy Grail of Darwinian evolution. I think Dr. Morris & Co. sought to pay homage to the Holy Grail by naming a nebula after it. The issue here is that Dr. Morris would like for Darwinists to have exclusive ownership of the microbiological double-helix and he is offended that the ID camp sees fit to claim it too. Nebula are often named after things they resemble, for example "The Horse Head" nebula. Had Dr. Morris & Co. named their discovery something like "The Twisted Rubber Band" nebula, I don't think he would have been offened if Dr. D posted a link to the story. Then again, Dr. D probably wouldn't have posted a link to the story. Dr. Morris' reaction reminds me of the reaction of "righteous indignation" we observed recently at the publication of certain cartoons in a Danish newspaper.Red Reader_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
08:46 PM
8
08
46
PM
PDT}

FYI Doctor Morris appears to be who he claims judging by his email address.DaveScot_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
03:40 PM
3
03
40
PM
PDT}

What exactly are you insinuating about this blog "Professor Morris"?Doug_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
03:36 PM
3
03
36
PM
PDT}

Hmmm, my origional post didn't seem to go thru. I have doubts this is Professor Morris. The quotes I read show him to be articulate, concise and well measured. The sentence structure well formed with descriptive adjectives and verbs in support of subject. IP nodes are easy to check, like Amino Acids, residual traces are left behind.Michaels7_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
03:31 PM
3
03
31
PM
PDT}

MrMorris, I suspect you're not the real Professor, maybe the one on Gilligan's Island. If I am wrong you have my humble apologies up front. Professor Morris is quoted as saying, "an unprecedented elongated double helix nebula near the center of our Milky Way galaxy". "Nobody has ever seen anything like that before in the cosmic realm." "Most nebulae are either spiral galaxies full of stars or formless amorphous conglomerations of dust and gas - space weather." "What we see indicates a high degree of order." Concise, to the point. Definitely, order, I agree, then, a Smithonite morphed and posted the following blurbs here on UCD.com, "Consequently, I am dismayed that it has been brought up in an ID blog. Logically fitting natural phenomena that display order and/or beauty into the scientific superstructure of self-consistent ideas about the universe about us are what makes science so satisfying, and so meaningful." This does not match Prof. Morris's quotes in the articles I've read so far either in beginning his sentence or ending. Then, "superstructure of "self-consistent", and "about the..., about us...". If this is Morris, his IQ dropped 40% since March 15 to declare ideas without run-on sentence structure. Sumpin fishy.... Tilapia, mmmmmm, I'm hungry. "Not everything is a God-induced miracle." Ding, here's the rub. "Smith" fails to recognize my humor in the comment of the post about order, happenstance, ahmmm "interneticular", same news - different site, while searching irelevant(yiddish names). Gosh, you'd think that's evolution. The imposter jumps to conclusions that were not made in my comment and the bait is snapped upon. The word miracle is projected not just onto me, but the entire blog - when all I stated was order. Prof. Morris in his articles comes across with more integrity and in verbal command to express his viewpoint. The hurricane comparisons to an eretz condition known well since the days of the Pharisee's was great improv and I giggled, truly :) I guestimate 150 million people tomorrow will look into their Spitzer Telescope to track the DNAHelix tomorrow to determine their next move. No, a Prof of the calibur of Mark Morris would not swing by for a hit and run like this. Maybe someone like Cypher, a non-entity who selects the blue pill illusion to rejoin the Smithonite. Why be original afterall? Onward, I'm really intrigued by how "near" the DNA nebulae is to the black hole. And the magnetic twisting, that's just pure Funstuff!Michaels7_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
02:28 PM
2
02
28
PM
PDT}

"Logically fitting natural phenomena that display order and/or beauty into the scientific superstructure of self-consistent ideas about the universe about us are what makes science so satisfying, and so meaningful. Not everything is a God-induced miracle." The last sentence is a meaningless addendum. Everything prior to "Not everything is a God-induced miracle", could be used to argue the opposite of what Dr. Morris seems to be advocating. "I am dismayed that it has been brought up in an ID blog." Really? I am dismayed that your philosphical/theological conclusion has no connection with the evidence that you are examining.Doug_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT}

I think you're being too accomodating to Doctor Morris who appears to have forgotten his place in the scheme of things. We the taxpayers paid for this research including Morris' time and the instruments he used. We didn't pay for nor ask for his opinion about whether or not God had anything to do with this nebula's formation although he's free to give it in an unofficial capacity on his own time. The data belongs to us as much as does him as we're all taxpayers and if we want to interpret it as a sign of design in the universe that's our business.DaveScot_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
08:56 AM
8
08
56
AM
PDT}

Professor Morris, Thank you for taking the time to comment here, although I am sorry you feel that your work is being tainted simply by being mentioned on this blog. Contrary to the image that is portrayed by opponents of ID, we do not suggest that something is 'so complex, it must have been a miracle'. Correct me if I am wrong, but I would imagine the formation of the double helix structure you have observed is analogous to the path traced out by an aeroplane's propellor tips as it passes through the air - no miracles involved! As you will surely note, there was no suggestion that this intriguing formation is 'designed' or that current science cannot adequately explain it. In his writings on design inferences, Wm Dembski has been at pains to point out the difference between the results of regularities (as we see here) and design. Finally, if you are willing to answer, I an very curious as to how you found out that your work was mentioned on this blog. Did you get an email from a 'defender of science' warning that your work is being used for 'creationist propoganda' or something along those lines? I ask because there is a long history of certain people (no names mentioned) going to a lot of effort to do just this...antg_{March 17, 2006
March
03
Mar
17
17
2006
02:50 AM
2
02
50
AM
PDT}

MRMorris As readily as hurricanes, eh. Wow. I didn't know you were able to fly aircraft into these double helix nebulas 50 times a year from start to finish measuring the forces and effects. So the article was wrong about this being the only one ever observed. It isn't really a one-time event that happened millions of years ago when no one was there to witness it. You have an eyewitness account of it just like hurricane Katrina. You're not just making up stories like someone died and gave you the exclusive right to tell this nebula's story. Thanks for the tip, Morris. It's been duly noted.DaveScot_{March 16, 2006
March
03
Mar
16
16
2006
09:15 PM
9
09
15
PM
PDT}

The nebula we have found with NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope is a remarkable example of something that can be accomodated by the scientific enterprise as readily as we can account for hurricanes. Although there is much to be learned yet about the nebula, what we do know can be well explained in terms of existing and well-supported scientific hypotheses about the Galaxy and its contents. Consequently, I am dismayed that it has been brought up in an ID blog. Logically fitting natural phenomena that display order and/or beauty into the scientific superstructure of self-consistent ideas about the universe about us are what makes science so satisfying, and so meaningful. Not everything is a God-induced miracle.MRMorris_{March 16, 2006
March
03
Mar
16
16
2006
08:50 PM
8
08
50
PM
PDT}

I love the speed of the interneticular vertices to disperse info. Researching the etymology of a Yiddish name, I came across the same information on a different site through entirely different pathway from Worldmagblog.com. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060315_dna_nebula.html Some great views as well as speculative statements. "Massive central black holes are the best sources for both the strong magnetic field and rotating body, and since most large galaxies have them, Morris expects DNA-like nebula may be common through out the universe." I love the translucent purpose of order. A smart bioengineer will take these matters to heart. ID has its place.Michaels7_{March 16, 2006
March
03
Mar
16
16
2006
04:18 PM
4
04
18
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply