"... Dr Alastair Noble, told the Sunday Herald it was “inevitable” the debate would make its way into schools"Intelligent Design is not science. Never has been, never will be. It's tantamount to arguing that since we don't understand something, a Wizard did it (to quote the Simpsons). The most compelling argument the ID folks have leveled follows these lines: To disprove the Theory of Evolution, all we have to do is show an instance of a biological structure which could not have arisen through natural means. Two immediate problems arise: first off, no such structure has been found. Michael Behe *OSoD* posited two major ones: The flagellum and the human clotting factor. Dr. Kenneth Miller devotes a chapter to each of these, showing how both could have arisen through natural selection and natural means (If I have a chance, I'll devote posts to this in more depth in the future). Secondly, even if they could disprove that element of Darwinian thought, we would not automatically assume that scriptural-based ID is the correct "Theory". It's not a binary system. If you are unfamiliar with this aspect of the debate, I recommend reading up on FSM-ism, a proposed alternative to ID. It has the same level of validity.
The president of the ID front in the linked article tips the balance to infuriating with the following quote, which frustrates me on multiple levels:
“Genesis chapter 1-11, which indeed many Darwinists and evolutionists say is myth or legend, I believe is historical, and it is cited 107 times in the New Testament, and Jesus refers himself to the early chapters of Genesis at least 25 times.”Logically, his argument can be reduced to 'The account is consistent with other elements of the same account'. If I were to claim that I had spent my weekend on Mars, and point to the fact that I talked later about how I got to Mars in my Magical Raptor-crewed Rocket Ship as supporting data for the assertion that I went, this would be logically consistent to the same level as Professor Norman Nevin's assertion above. It would not, however, confer any level of validity to my claim of interplanetary excursion. Logically speaking, a statement cannot prove itself.
Additionally, I bristle at his implication that it is a sign of a lack of faith for someone to read the Genesis account as a mythology. In the biblical account, as in the naturalistic model, no human could have first-hand experiential knowledge of those events prior to the 6th day of creation. The Mosaic accounts in the book of Genesis are written as an explanation for the mysteries of the natural world where no explanation is readily available. That should sound pretty darn close to a definition for a mythology.
Of course, the creationists and ID folks have in their back pocket the greatest rhetorical cheat code of all time: an omnipotent designer could have, by nature, done anything. But that's not a logical or scientific argument. It's a cop-out, and - worst of all - one that eliminates, rather than expands, the debate.
All right, this is just making me more upset. I'm off to train my Raptor Rocket Crew. The weekend's only five days away.
Touched by his noodly appendage, mankind was gifted with intelligence and kindness. The great Flying Spaghetti Monster of the sky has bestowed on us an amazing quality to see truths in the world; everything that we know has been a blessing from his saucy grace.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, I completely don't understand those who bend every interpretation of reality that they have to in order to keep a literal interpretation of the Bible. No one now was there when it was written and so we are all taking it on cultural faith that it wasn't written by a complete charlatan a long time ago who wanted to fool a lot of people. Most likely is that it was a series of texts that were written by more people than we think who didn't talk to each other, didn't read the other books, and didn't have anything like the same interpretation of God at all. It is fascinating cultural legend, potentially valuable lessons and wisdom, and a bunch of other random stuff that is really not helpful or relevant to a modern life at all. A how-to guide in Leviticus about selling your daughter into slavery? Few people need that these days, and yes, they are evil.