Intelligent Design Probability

Karsten Pultz on why randomness depends on order

Pultz: Comparing to evolution, the randomness produced by the orderly dice, would be the same randomness having produced the dice itself, because that’s how evolution works, slowly building order by random events from the bottom up. Applying the same hypothetical process to bicycles the random event that I get a puncture when riding my bike would be the same type of event which initially created the bike.

Design inference Engineering Intelligent Design

Why a mechanic infers design. Karsten Pultz explains

Pultz: Empirical evidence (from the world of engineering) supports the assumption that complex functional systems like motors do not arise via random changes to already existing systems. Empirical evidence, even from biology itself, also supports the common knowledge that random changes to functional systems disturb, disrupt, or destroy function.

Intelligent Design Irreducible Complexity theistic evolution

Karsten Pultz: Christian students in Denmark dig up the fossil of theistic evolution

Pultz: They find support in writings from the Biologos organization but also, weirdly enough, turn to atheist Stefaan Blancke and his paper “Irreducible incoherence and Intelligent Design: a look into the conceptual toolbox of a pseudoscience”. I guess the old saying that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” can be applied to this bizarre situation where young adherents to theistic evolution join ranks with atheists to prevent other young Christians from being drawn to ID.

Intelligent Design

Our Danish correspondent, Karsten Pultz, brings us up to date on Jørn Dyerberg and the growth of ID thinking in Scandinavia

My excitement made me overcome my telephone-phobia and I called Dyerberg to have him elaborate on this statement. He told me that the probabilistic issues alone obviously render Neo-Darwinian evolution unscientific and pointed specifically to the Neo-Darwinian origin of life scenario being totally improbable and therefore not scientifically viable.

Culture Intelligent Design Peer review Science

Karsten Pultz comes to the defense of the Elsevier editors who say they did not know that the Hossjer–Thorvaldsen paper was ID-friendly

The editors need not, of course, sympathize with the ID perspective to think that evidence for it should be permitted to be discussed. At one time, that was a conventional intellectual position. But the Darwinians, as we’ve said here earlier, are an early flowering of Cancel Culture. No evidence may be discussed that may be thought to favor an Incorrect view.

Fine tuning Intelligent Design Irreducible Complexity

Karsten Pultz offers some thoughts on the flap over the now-famous Thorvaldsen and Hössjer paper

It should also be considered that in his book Der Teil und das Ganze, Werner Heisenberg expresses his own and also Niels Bohrs’ doubt that random mutations could have produced any of the complex biological systems… Bohr adds that while natural selection obviously occurs it is the idea that new species come about by random changes, which is very hard to imagine, even if this is the only way science can explain it.