Science historian Michael Flannery offers a vid link below. He notes,
Two things are important to bear in mind: first, nothing in Hoyle’s rejection bears upon a teleological universe (Hoyle’s steady state can–and did–coexist with a purposeful and intelligently guided universe); and second, Hoyle’s rejection of the big bang still allows him to have very skeptical view of “safe” science and government power.
The frequently repeated claim that Fred Hoyle was an atheist has been greatly exaggerated. While Hoyle had been an atheist early in his career, he didn’t end that way. This is made clear in his book, The Intelligent Universe (1983) where he argued that “the information-rich” universe was guided and controlled by an “overriding intelligence,” and in the final chapter of his autobiography, Home is Where the Wind Blows (1994), “A Lucky Ending.”
More re Fred Hoyle.
Hey! Didn’t we also just recently get the story about Karl Popper dismissing Darwinism? Despite all the attempts to talk around his view?
Has someone, somehow, unblocked the news spout. Or what?
See also: Evolutionary biologists today want Popper’s name but not his game. Increasingly, one depends on these reticent or redacted sources of information to put together what really happened. It sounds as though Popper spent some time sheltering himself from the hellstorm of wounded pretensions that make up accepted current evolutionary biology and eventually realized that, like sociology, it is not really a science at present anyway. So why die on that hill? Hence the confusion around what Popper said. (He was fleeing the scene at the time.)
Follow UD News at Twitter!