Thursday, August 18, 2005
Unmask The Intelligent Designer!
“This is not something that began recently or something that began in reaction to what’s going on in the larger environment,” said Harvard spokesman B.D. Colen. “It’s a project that began because scientists are seeking answers to some of the biggest questions ever posed.”
Proponents of Intelligent Design theory, however, who believe that the complexities of nature cannot be explained by mere random chance, are skeptical. The remarks of Harvard chemistry professor David Liu about the nature of the research project are of some concern to those who desire a purely objective scientific endeavour not driven by an ideological agenda.
“My expectation is that we will be able to reduce this to a very simple series of logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention,” Liu was quoted as saying in remarks that seemed to indicate, at least on his part, a pre-determined result or desired result of the research.
Did all these idiots fail their basic science courses or did they sleep through class? Nah, I bet they went to a school where the teachers couldn't tell the difference between science and religion. So a scientist has a theory which he or she intends to prove. She does this by running experiments or showing how her theory is supported by other observations. He or she publishes this in a scientific journal or book so other scientists can challenge, critique, support or confirm the scientist's assertions. If she can't make the case, the tests are not reproducible, her theory has no testable predictive value or her assertions can't stand up to further testing and review, her theory won't be accepted. Just because a scientist may have a theory that they intend to prove doesn't mean anyone else will agree.
How many proponents of Intelligent Design (ID) start with the assumption that there is an intelligent designer and then go about defending their belief?
I suggest the Discovery Institute round up some donors and start their own scientific research to explain the origins of the universe. Better yet, ID proponents are very coy about naming their intelligent designer. I challenge them to start scientific research to identify this designer. Is it the God of Christians? Is it Satan? Is it intelligent life from another universe? Is it Papa Smurf?
Science does not claim to have final proofs or absolute truths. A scientific theory lasts until a better scientific theory comes along. Science evolves as knowledge expands. ID relies almost exclusively on conjecture, belief and faith. That is not science. That is religion. If ID wants to be taught in school as part of the scientific curriculum, then it must adhere to the scientific process. Otherwise it must stay in religion class.
Technorati Tags: Religion Intelligent Design
