Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

ID vs. Darwinism: Same evidence, different interpretations?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

ID advocates and Darwinists can look at the same evidence and see different things. The recent National Geographic film March of the Penguins created a minor furore because some thought of it as pro-ID, though the filmmakers denied that.

One difficulty is that, denial or not, elements of the penguins’ behavior inevitably raise questions about Darwinism. However, some Darwinists respond to the problem simply by reinterpreting those elements along Darwinist lines.

For example, responding to the idea that the male penguins co-operate to share the body warmth, the well-known Steve Jones, professor of genetics at University College London, replies,

A group of penguins standing upright looks like co-operation, but in fact the ones on the outside are struggling to get in and those on the inside are trying to stand their ground: it’s a classic Darwinian struggle. The idea that the life of a penguin is any more beautiful than that of a malaria virus is absurd.

Actually, the book narrative and the film do not depict a classic Darwinian struggle. The book states that the male penguins, left alone with the eggs in a harsh climate while the females return to the ocean to feed, spiral in and out of their “turtle” formation, in a slow and orderly way, taking their fair turn in the warm center of the huddle:

The males can be aggressive the rest of the year. But they are docile and cooperative now, united to protect the eggs and survive the cold. Each takes turns getting warm by spending time near the center of the turtle. The huddled mass coils around itself in an undulating spiral. The penguins on the outside move in toward the center, the ones on the inside go outward. And this rotation happens very gently in order to safeguard the eggs. (p. 75)

So the French polar team on the site saw a completely different scene from Steve Jones!

The French polars may support “evolution,” as they say (but so?). But they are clearly not convinced Darwinists, as is Jones, or they would see a struggle of the fittest for survival, just as Jones did. As my co-author Mario Beauregard (Harper San Francisco, 2007) likes to say, quoting the Talmud, “You do not see life as it is. You see it as you are.”

Note: A biologist friend writes me to say that

… there IS no “malaria virus.” Malaria is caused by a protozoan, a parasite. Biologically speaking, it’s even further removed from being a virus than a bacterium. If Darwinist Steve Jones actually said what’s quoted above, he’s surprisingly ignorant.

Of course, Jones may have been misquoted by the reporter. After all, a New York Times reporter recently quoted Discovery Institute’s Steve Meyer as referring to “biblical science,” when he actually said “biological science.” (It’s the second item.)

In any event, Jones has announced that he has given up trying to persuade “creationists” , because he fears being quoted out of context or accused of lying. So I don’t suppose he will be in any mood to discuss any of this.

Comments
Strangelove:"I am puzzled. Why is cooperation amongst animals only evidence for ID? Why can’t the TOE account for cooperation amongst members of the same species?" Of courst TOE can account for cooperation amongst members of the same species. A series of fortunate mutations in the selfish gene caused it to mutate into the cooperation gene. Of course, this first happened in a small isolated group while the selfish gene searched the nearby genetic space to find the DNA code to cause penguins to rotate in the optimum coopertative manner to keep each other warm-too fast and the penguins don't warm enough, too slow and the ones on the outside freeze. Once the cooperation gene became fixed in the isolated group, the isolated group invaded the larger population and the cooperation gene became fixed in the larger population This is why searching the fossil record shows only the sudden appearance of cooperating penguins followed by a long period of stasis. Seriously though, TOE can explain anything - like why men are faithful to their wives or why they cheat on their wives - which is why TOE explains nothing.Jehu
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
06:29 PM
6
06
29
PM
PDT
Strangelove:"I am puzzled. Why is cooperation amongst animals only evidence for ID? Why can’t the TOE account for cooperation amongst members of the same species?" Of courst TOE can account for cooperation amongst members of the same species. There were a series of furtonate mutations in the selfish gene that caused it to mutate into the cooperation gene. Of course, this first happened in a small isolated group while the selfish gene searched the nearby genetic space to find the optimum code to cause penguins to rotate in a coopertative manner to keep each other warm-too fast and the penguins don't warm enough, too slow and the ones on the outside freeze. Once the cooperation gene became fixed in the isolated group, the isolated group invaded the larger population and cooperation gene spread to the larger group. This is why searching the fossil record shows only the sudden appearance of cooperating penguins followed by a long period of stasis. Seriously though, TOE can explain anything - like why men are faithful to their wives or why they cheat on their wives - which is why TOE explains nothing.Jehu
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
06:26 PM
6
06
26
PM
PDT
Oh, and if you search instead for "Steve Jones Maleria" the first link is http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/telegraph_malaria.pdf from December 2004. It's a PDF which doesn't allow copy and paste so there may be some errors in my manual copy: "Last week I spent several hours in what was once a malarious swamp. The All-Party Parliamentary Maleria group was meeting in the Grand Comittee Room of Westminster Hall (...) under the joint chairmanship pf the famously blunt Ian Gibson MP and his more sedate Conservative colleage Stephen O'Brian . Both have a stake in the disease, with the Labour man an expert on certain cellular structures found within the parasite". (My emphasis) I am not a jounalist, so I don't know as much about checking sources as you. But it seems to me that Steve Jones knew that Maleria was a parasite back in 2004, and also that the BBC and the british government of the day (not that that means anything) considered him a worthy expert. I look forward to a prominent apology to Prof. Jones (as the Observer managed) here and at the 'The ID Report'.steveh
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
06:13 PM
6
06
13
PM
PDT
> "Did the HIV virus used to be a different virus and/or not a virus at all?" Yes, HIV is a descendent of SIV (Simian immunodeficiency virus). Genetic comparisons show that SIV has actually mutated into HIV several times, giving several different strains of HIV. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simian_immunodeficiency_virus And, yes, naturalistic evolution can explain cooperation between individuals. It's actually pretty easy to think of how this sort of cooperation might've arisen in this situation.BC
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
03:17 PM
3
03
17
PM
PDT
Oops. The final end quote (') in the previous post is in the wrong place. It should be after the closing double quote following 'religious right"'. The last sentence is mine not yours. Also I said 'by by' instend of 'by' which may have been prescient on my part although I wasn't aware of it at the time :)steveh
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
03:01 PM
3
03
01
PM
PDT
"Of course, Jones may have been misquoted by the reporter." If you google for "Steve Jones penguins" (Without the quote marks), the first link you get is: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1572642,00.html The following apology was printed in the Observer's For the record column, Sunday September 25 2005 In the following article we misquoted Steve Jones, professor of Genetics at University College, London, mentioning a malaria 'virus'. Malaria is, in fact, caused not by a virus but by a protozoan parasite. Apologies. Also the fourth link produced by the above google search is an entry by by you on the ID Report from July 1st: http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/2/2006/07/01/lstrongglemgmarch_of_the_penguins_l_emg it's basically a longer version of this UD post which contains the same remark about Steve Jones possible ignorance and also the following quote; 'And in the UK, where the film was released in December, the Guardian Observer (September 18, 2005) sniffed about "How the penguin's life story inspired the US religious right". That link is precisely the same as the one I gave above containing the apology for the misquote.'steveh
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
02:55 PM
2
02
55
PM
PDT
The problem is- you're comparing ID with TOE. ID isn't opposed to TOE, just the Darwinian explanation. Darwin said that life, in every species, was in fact a constant struggle between species and within them to kill the lesser among them and carry the more "successful" into the future.JasonTheGreek
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
01:30 PM
1
01
30
PM
PDT
Denyse, I am puzzled. Why is cooperation amongst animals only evidence for ID? Why can't the TOE account for cooperation amongst members of the same species? Your comments seem to imply that the TOE requires constant and harsh competition. I just want to add that Steve Jones made some blunderheaded comments. He is clearly not an expert on the behaviours of penguins.Strangelove
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
10:10 AM
10
10
10
AM
PDT
"His talk laid out some of the evidence for evolution, such as that of changes in the HIV virus after infecting people." Did the HIV virus used to be a different virus and/or not a virus at all?russ
July 22, 2006
July
07
Jul
22
22
2006
09:17 AM
9
09
17
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply