RE: [asa] Expelled and ID (can ID be proven???)

From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
Date: Mon Apr 21 2008 - 17:52:53 EDT

Hi James-

 

You said:

"In fact Bernie's statement, "They think by disproving known
naturalistic methods, God is then the default answer-but it isn't."
just is not true. The spokesman are VERY careful to say they can NOT
prove the God of the Bible.""

 

Let's look at one major example. Behe. His main contribution is
"irreducible complexity." The scientific method starts with a
hypothesis.

 

Hypothesis: An intelligent being created life, because it is impossible
by natural processes (irreducible complexity).

How can we test that? How can we falsify it?

 

If you say "irreducible complexity" is true, therefore there is an
intelligent designer, have you proven all other options are closed? Is
it possible there's a way to get from A to B that Behe hasn't thought of
(and his critics haven't thought of it either?)? From my cursory
understanding of his witnessing on the stand in the Dover PA trial case
he didn't seem to be all that familiar with his critics. He didn't come
across as one who knew what all his critics had to say and had answers
for them. And I don't think that is asking too much of him.

 

Dembski and math is the same thing. He is proving, mathematically that
nature can't do evolution, and if he can prove that, the only remaining
answer is "God did it." Is that really the only remaining answer?

 

Also, I think a centerpiece of the ID design argument is the complexity
on the molecular level. Incredible micro machines. This stuff is all
so mind-blowing complex and small, God had to have done it. But is that
true? There are a lot of natural things that also blow the mind, in "big
world" (the cosmos) and "small world" (at the atom level and below).

 

I think the best the ID'ers can do is falsify evolution,,, but don't
conflate that with proving intelligent design... it could just mean that
the right mechanisms for evolution aren't known yet. Yes, God could
have done it, but the job of science is to try to explain the natural
laws behind everything. Miracles simply can't be used in equations-they
don't behave or act on cue like natural laws do. ;-)

 

The interesting thing about Dawkins comment, about a signature if ID if
true, is that it only shows ID, and not God. Who made the designer?
Dawkins would then think that the designer should be sought out- likely
some alien who evolved somewhere else. That makes evolution even harder
to figure out, because now we have to learn how life started on a
different planet (and environment) if it was simply "planted" here. Of
course, all the life-forms wouldn't have been planted here (apes and
dolphins), so still life must have evolved on earth from a simple
life-form and branched out from there. Because no kind of spaceship,
like a Noah's Ark, would deliver apes, whales, zebras, snakes, insects,
plants, etc. I heard that our far flung spacecraft could also be
sending out life-forms (bacteria, etc, from earth, as stow-aways).
Interesting thought- what if a space-craft probe (with germ life-forms)
from another planet hit our earth eons ago, and the "people" who sent it
died-out long ago?

 

...Bernie

 

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of James Mahaffy
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 1:13 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Expelled and ID

 

Folks

 

>>> On 4/19/2008 at 5:39 PM, in message

<20080419224008.9F95071145D@gray.dordt.edu>, "Dehler, Bernie"

<bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:

> ID is saying it is "science" so it can be more serious. To make it

> science, you have to bear on scientific things, such as math

> (statistics) and biology. So they are appealing to the hard sciences
to

> bring it into the scientific realm.

>

>

>

> However, they have no scientific hypothesis. "God made it" is not a

> hypothesis, since it can't be tested. By definition, the scientific

> method requires a hypothesis that can be tested. You also can't test

> evolution per "origin of life," but there are other parts of evolution

> which are testable... ID has nothing testable. They think by
disproving

> known naturalistic methods, God is then the default answer-but it
isn't.

>

 

Please don't pick on strawman. ID has gained notice in the scientific
world in

part because some of the heavy players do good science. Behe is his
latest book

"The edge of evolution makes a scientific case for what can and can not
be caused

by random mutation. The examples he draws on are from his own published
area of

hemoglobin research.

 

Dembski makes mathematical arguments that is possible to detect design
mathematically.

 

Gonzalez does a good job of showing that earth is uniquely fit to
support life. I believe a lot of his

well cited publications dealt with defining what conditions where needed
to have a planet that could support life.

 

 

I would agree that there a bunch of second tier ID folks that don't do
much research but

it surely is NOT true of these three. I am not suggesting that the
science of these three is

always right but it clearly is science. I see weakness in ID trying to
only make a scientific

argument (I have too much of C. Van til's presuppositionalism in me). In
fact Bernie's statement,

"They think by disproving known naturalistic methods, God is then the
default answer-but it isn't." just is not true.

The spokesman are VERY careful to say they can NOT prove the God of the
Bible.

 

It is possible that over time ID could replace YEC's but then ID would
become something quite different.

 

bcc to a colleague (as a bcc his e-mail is not out on the web in our ASA
archives.

 

James Mahaffy (ASA member).

 

 

 

 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with

"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon, 21 Apr 2008 14:52:53 -0700

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 21 2008 - 17:54:57 EDT