Finally, Nick Matzke Finds An Opponent That Makes Him Look Smart

_{March 30, 2006

Intelligent Design

1}_{Categories
Intelligent Design}

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

I’d like to be the first to congratulate Nick Matzke on finding an adversary that makes Nick look well versed in science by comparison. It’s about time. Maybe if Nick starting fisking nursery rhymes for bad science he could appear even smarter than he does now.

Update: Awe shucks. It looks like I was wrong. The adversary is Dr. Robert C. Newman who was awarded a doctorate in theoretical astrophysics from (Ivy League) Cornell in 1967. Nick has not only failed to attain a doctorate, he switched his major at an unremarkable school from chemistry and biology to the much more lightweight field of geography. What’s next for Nick, a doctorate in basket weaving from the ITT Technical Institute? Theoretical Astrophysics is pretty much your stereotypical rocket science and far beyond Nick’s meager intellectual abilities. My abject apologies to Dr. Newman for the comparison.

Comments

God laughs.... Mockers do not know the Bible's Hebraic roots. Angels are not just mystical beings. Dr. Newman knows this with his educational background. Angels perform several functions in service to God. 1) as Messengers(physical and dreams), 2) as Newman put forward - intervention in natural processes when required, 3) spiritual warfare. Mockers are open to ridicule and scriptures support it. And while I certainly pray for them, I do not suffer fools gladly. But in a small attempt at education.... Newman's ID speculations re: angels. They do appear as physical messengers(shalosh eesh - a 3 men) sharing a meal with Abraham. Or, invisible to the naked eye with physical results as in Job, who experienced physical sickness and lost all worldly goods. Thus, insertion of intelligent malevolent manipulation of physical matter on earth. In this case Satan(sawtan or shatan) was allowed by God to test Job's trust in God, but not only Job. All around him were winnowed without realizing it and then as now, God's word does not change - but science does. Satan is a fallen angel distorted in typical fashion today as a red beast with horns, constrained by medieval concepts. Its a false image. Such pictures are artistically inspired much like macro-evolution's wild-speculative art(psuedo-science), in attempt to depict what cannot be seen. Promoted like artistic drawings of Nebraska man(based on a pigs tooth) the drawings of satan are blatantly false and have no revelation in the Word. Its not as if Newman is waltzing into Museums with a pigs tooth. But mockers know not even what they mock. Unfortunately many Christian's promote false images too out of ignorance from ancient mystics. In reality, Satan was created beautifully, but he opposed God, desiring 'his own way' and put himself above the Most High. This is allegory as well for men who ignore God's will, who claim superior intelligence by their words and deeds believing they themselves are above their Creator. A generations memory is short as in Exodus. Therefore, the cunning aspect of a forked tongue followed by the blind. Hollywood to the contrary, the old serpant is not some red-devil horned monster, "he's a beautiful deception" and arrogance is his mirror in which he swims. The message of satan exist as much in man as around him. Robert C Newman is a fine example among thousands before him of creative intelligence, such as Newton, Pascal, Kelvin, and Mendel who see thru the deception and ask similar questions to allow their imaginations wonder at creation, designer intervention and at beauty in order. Speculating on intervention from a Creator/Designer is 1000 times more creative than a scoffers low-brow humor. Having read Dr. Newman's article, he admits it highly speculative. But parts of his article are scientifically sound as in forensics. For example, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Dead Sea Cities destruction would be an excellent use of forensic ID of Biblical history. I do not agree with all his speculations on malevolent forms in nature. Unlike macro-evolution however, the Bible is the most accurate historic document proven by sacred and secular text. The most examined by archeology and scientific study. The overwelming evidence of Biblical history far outshines that of macro-evolutions False Historical Stop and Starts loosely spun narrative. The Bible says more about man than McVo ever gave us. One should not equate McVo with real science. If one must build up self-esteem by mocking others beliefs, then they have little foundation to stand on. And much like Dawkins they attract the quick sinking sand while storms gather about them. Sagan predicted life on Mars and everywhere across Billions and Billions and Billions of planets, plus he waxed hysterical fear about the first gulf war's impact of oil burnoff on the environment. Salute - atheist, evolutionist scientist for that prediction. Darwin equated African's as little more than missing links to apes and man to be undesirable and most assuredly eliminated as losers in his paradigm of natural selection. We know now, Darwin's views were uneducated twaddle of racist comments today - don't we? And PT wants to mock Newman's use of ID while their false idol Darwin reduces whole races to doom? So, lets play mockery 101, shall we? Lets match wits with "true" science from their McVo god of this world. hattip: http://www.nwcreation.net/wiki/index.php?title=Darwin_himself_was_racist The great father of the exterminated.... "At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. (Darwin 1887 p.156)." Yes, a great mind to follow. Shriveled dead fruit on the vine.... Tune in next week to McVo's god for speculations on North American Black Bear -> Whale quotes from Origion of Species. Bring it on, "Faster Please". Newman predicted the ridicule by the scoffers...., little do they know their own god's history.Michaels7_{March 31, 2006
March
03
Mar
31
31
2006
05:17 PM
5
05
17
PM
PDT}

I just finished reading through Matzke's post and a whole lot of the athe...er...evolutionists' feedback on it and couldn't shake the feeling that there was a bigoted anti-Christian vibe comming from it. Nah, that couldn't be it; everyone knows that neo-Darwinian evolution is 100% about science! :lol:crandaddy_{March 30, 2006
March
03
Mar
30
30
2006
08:28 PM
8
08
28
PM
PDT}

At first glance, it would appear the DS's initial comment about the Newman article -- that it "makes Nick look well versed in science by comparison" -- was based on DS's reading of the content of the article and the ideas proposed in it.

Only later did DS find the academic qualifications of Dr. Newman and turn his comments toward Nick Matzke.

So the question of the content of the Newman article remains. Any comments on the feasibility of using ID to discern the activities of benevolent or malevolent spirits in the world?
Actually I didn't read the article until after I'd written both the opener and the update. I pretty much dismissed it as nonsense from the opening talking about angels. I didn't change my opinion after reading the whole thing. It is utter nonsense not remotely connected to ID or science. I can't imagine what Newman was thinking. Maybe it's an early April Fool's joke. Be that as it may, he's still head and shoulders above Matzke based upon his past. Matzke has accomplished nothing noteworthy in his short life and deserved every bit of criticism for picking such low hanging fruit. -ds Father Wolf_{March 30, 2006
March
03
Mar
30
30
2006
06:30 PM
6
06
30
PM
PDT}

It's just ridicule and spitefulness...you mean, as opposed to Dave's highly substantive post above that you are replying to?
Coming from the crown prince of Darwinian flame artists I'll take that as a compliment, Ed. Thanks! Ed Brayton_{March 30, 2006
March
03
Mar
30
30
2006
11:39 AM
11
11
39
AM
PDT}

Boy, I just read the article, then I read the post on Panda's Thumb and all the comments. It is a constant stream of ridicule and spitefulness. Not a single constructive comment on the whole thing. Very hostile and closedminded. Who are these guys? THey seem to know who UD and Dave Scot are. My next point would have to be removed by the moderator for being overtly hostile so I will moderate it myself. It's worth reading the comments though just to see how they think.Doug_{March 30, 2006
March
03
Mar
30
30
2006
10:12 AM
10
10
12
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply