Intelligent Design

“Grill the ID Scientist,” 9 June 2009, University of Pittsburgh

Spread the love

(an announcement from Professor David Snoke:)

Upcoming event:

“Grill the ID Scientist”
Tuesday, June 9
7 PM, University of Pittsburgh Campus (room TBA)

A network of scientists known as the Intelligent Design (ID) community continues to question basic tenets of Darwinism and origin-of-life scenarios. Not only are their views controversial in scientific circles — many in the evangelical world, who might be expected to embrace ID, are also not sold on the value of the ID program.

This event brings together a panel of scientists associated with the ID movement. After a short presentation, the bulk of the evening will be given to questions from the audience. This event is aimed primarily at researchers, graduate students and advanced undergrad students in the sciences. It is open to anyone, but participants must register in advance by sending email to snoke@pitt.edu. In the event of limited seating, preference will be given to grad students and researchers in the life sciences.

Panel:

— Doug Axe, Biologic Institute (formerly of Cambridge University)
— Michael Behe, Lehigh University
— Ann Gauger, Biologic Institute
— David Keller, University of New Mexico
— John Sanford, Cornell University

+ others TBA

moderated by David Snoke, University of Pittsburgh

20 Replies to ““Grill the ID Scientist,” 9 June 2009, University of Pittsburgh

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    “Grill the ID Scientist,”;;;; LOL Be sure to check the hardcore Darwinists for Bar B Que Grills at the door….

  2. 2
    tribune7 says:

    I hope nobody tries to be a hot dog and definitely don’t try to wing anything.

  3. 3
    herb says:

    This is a great idea, but I’m not sure how much influence an event aimed at researchers and students is going to have with Evangelicals. My church is relatively moderate, but I see a lot more support there for people like “Drs” Kent Hovind and Carl Baugh than I do for ID. How about an similar event targeted at the Christian public, especially those with young-earth creationist views?

  4. 4

    I read it as “Drill with the ID scientists”.

  5. 5
    Robert Byers says:

    Fine for any break in the wall of error.
    Yet I.D is not people who believe in the accounts of genesis.
    It’s excellent to have quality thinkers and scientists helping out but Genesis creationists need intellectual and research support that helps fight the attacks against the bible on origins.
    I welcome all efforts but yes we need to be persuaded the i.D folk are on our side enough.

  6. 6
    CannuckianYankee says:

    “many in the evangelical world, who might be expected to embrace ID, are also not sold on the value of the ID program.”

    That’s kind of vague. How many, and what’s “the evangelical world?”

  7. 7
    CannuckianYankee says:

    “Some educators will find it surprising that many fairly advanced topics of philosophy and Christian theology are included in this course. Is this appropriate for high school or college students? Absolutely. Why should students be experts in machinery and equations and unlearned in related philosophical and theological questions? Historically, physics and philosophy have interacted strongly, under the name Natural Philosophy, hence the title of this book.”

    (From Dr. Snoke’s website. Regarding a high-school physics class and subsequent textbook by Snoke.)

    Could he be an ID sympathiser?

  8. 8
    Kyrilluk says:

    I would be interested to see some of the talk about science (not really interested in religion and stuff) on Youtube. Is there going to be an effort to film the courses for people who can’t come (I’m French and I’m in England by the way)?

  9. 9
    iconofid says:

    CannuckianYankee asks:

    “Could he [David Snoke] be an ID sympathiser?”

    Yes. He co-authored a famous I.D. paper with Michael Behe:

    Michael Behe and David W. Snoke (2004). “Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues”. Protein Science 13 (10).

  10. 10
    CannuckianYankee says:

    “Yes. He co-authored a famous I.D. paper with Michael Behe:

    Michael Behe and David W. Snoke (2004). “Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues”. Protein Science 13 (10).”

    Thanks, iconofid. I found a link to the paper here:

    http://www.discovery.org/a/2183

  11. 11
    CannuckianYankee says:

    Woops. http://www.proteinscience.org/.....04802904v1

    – That’s where DI says it is, but I did an advanced article search there, and it’s not there. I wonder why.

  12. 12
    Alan Fox says:

    Try here.

    Link tag seems to work if you put in an extra “. Bizarre!

  13. 13
    Alan Fox says:

    Except it doesn’t! Looked OK in preview.

    http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.g.....id=2286568

  14. 14
    CannuckianYankee says:

    Hey, thanks Alan. It worked.

  15. 15
    uoflcard says:

    I agree with Kyrilluk – this should be videotaped and posted on youtube, etc. I’m guessing most people on this blog (and elsewhere) who are interested will not be able to attend.

  16. 16
    todd says:

    They ought to set up a youtube account and solicit questions, similar to the CNN youtube debates in the primaries last year.

  17. 17
    Kyrilluk says:

    Yes, this would definitely generate a lot of debate!

  18. 18
    Joseph says:

    What’s to grill?

    ID = Creationism = fixity of species

    I know that because the NCSE and Mike Shermer say so.

  19. 19
    David Kellogg says:

    I can’t be there, but here’s a question: how would new solutions to the problem of RNA formation affect ID?

  20. 20
    Joseph says:

    David Kellogg:

    I can’t be there, but here’s a question: how would new solutions to the problem of RNA formation affect ID?

    It would depend on whether or not the formed RNA(s) can perform some function.

    It would also depend on how long the newly formed RNA(s) stayed formed- ie do not dissolve or breakdown.

    On a similar note Dr Axe thinks that the formation of the amino acid Tryptophan is beyond the reach of non-telic processes.

    Or maybe is was studying how it is formed led him to the design inference.

Leave a Reply