I don’t know any other way to say this nicely. ID is a sham. It’s a large group of Christian apologists trying to discredit a science that tells them things that they don’t want to hear.
Why is it a fraud?
The goal of the Intelligent Design Movement is
To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God.
All the people who promote ID are either to dumb to understand what the ID movement wants (which is nothing less than a Christian Theocracy) or want the same thing.
A commenter recently asked me to review Casie Luskin’s response to Nick Matzke’s review of Steven Meyer’s Darwin’s Doubt. Confused yet? Me too. Casie is a lawyer (and not a very good one, by any account). Meyer is not a scientist. In spite of the books he’s published, he’s never done any actual science… well, he’s never reported that he’s done any actual science.
But that’s the whole point behind the Intelligent Design Movement. To destroy science. Why should Meyer and Dembski and Behe and Axe and the other be doing science? They don’t believe in it. They want to destroy it and replace it with God.
Except, God has never built a cell phone. God has never built a power plant. God has never healed a person. God has never grown a single ear of corn. How do these people expect to survive without science? Which does do those things.
I while back, I posted a challenge to pro-ID proponents about Darwin’s Doubt. So far, not a single one of them, in spite of all the comments, accusations, and plans, have answered a single one of them. In spite of a couple of people telling me that they would e-mail me or send me the book… no one has.
You see, the ID Movement has a problem. They are vehemently anti-science… not just anti-evolution, but anti-science. That whole “replace materialistic explanations” thing covers every single thing in the entire universe.
The problem is that they have to use science to replace science. Why? Because they know that only science works. They know this, but they can’t accept it. Why? Because of religion.
Douglas Axe does ‘research’ (for lack of a better term for what he does) by taking chunks out of proteins and then shouting, “Look, it doesn’t work anymore.”* Meyer’s ‘research’ involves looking at other people’s (actual scientists) research about the Cambrian explosion, misrepresenting it, ignoring material he doesn’t like, then having a friend sneak it into a peer-reviewed journal. Behe’s research involves looking at simple computer models of proteins, randomly doing things to them, and showing that nothing complex (like us for example) could possibly evolve. Of course, we’re here, aren’t we.
There are some really good questions that no ID proponent has ever answered.
- How do ID proponents explain the diversity of life?
- Why use science to show that science is wrong?
- Who is the designer?
- Is the designer from the Cambrian still alive and working today?
- How does the designer work?
Let’s play a game of pretend. All you ID supporters, get ready. This will be fun for you.
The game is called “You Win”.
The game begins with ID winning. It’s a rather odd way to start a game, but it gets more interesting. Intelligent Design has won the day. In 1,000 words or less…
What now?
Go ahead. Tell us how the world will be with ID in charge of science. Here are some initial questions to get you started on the kinds of things you need to be thinking about.
- Will bacteria, fruit flies, viruses, insects, etc. stop evolving? In other words, can we stop research into new drugs because evolution will stop win ID wins?
- How will you do research into new drugs (for example) without materialistic science? What non-materialistic system works better? Explain the non-materialistic method.
- What will we teach children in schools? Describe a curriculum and lesson plan for a 5-day exploration of Intelligent Design (keeping in mind that 40% of class time should be a lab that shows, unambiguously that ID works).
- Since “Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John’s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory.” Does it only work for Christians? Will Muslims need their own “science”? What about atheists, pagans, Hindus, etc?
Let me be perfectly clear. I will be honestly shocked and amazed if anyone even attempts to answer these questions. I’ll be much less surprised if someone tries to explain why my questions are wrong. This would become the “ID by semantic argument” mode of discussion.
ID proponents (also known as cdesign proponentists) will do anything, have done anything, to keep from having to answer these questions. And this is how they should be dealt with.
Evolution is established science. It works. ID proponents can whine and cry and bitch and moan all they want to. Evolution simply works and nothing that they say or do will change that. Evolution is one of the most useful explanatory frameworks in all of science. I’d put it above Einstein’s work, but I may be biased.
We have to stop defending established science. In all the years, the lost court case, the tens of thousands of peer-reviewed works… no ID leader has changed sides. They aren’t going to. They have a vested (monetary) interest in maintaining their work… their ‘belief’. The ID people are paid by the Discovery Institute. For all practical purposes, they do nothing except collect a check.
We have to change the minds of people. We can use the same tactics that they use. It works better on lay people. Force them to talk about ID. Force them to support ID with evidence.
If someone has a question about evolution, then we can answer it. But the absolute best thing in the world for real science is to have an ID proponent in a court room or on stage stuttering because they can’t answer a simple question like “Who is the designer?” or “What is the ID research program?”
_____________________________
* This is stupid for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that he hasn’t allowed his modified protein to react with every substance, DNA, RNA, and protein that could possibly ever exist. Which means that he doesn’t know if it has a function or not. He just knows that he broke it. Congratulations, Dr. Axe, you’ve achieved the same skills as my 6-year-old with his LEGO sets.
** It’s a good thing that proteins don’t evolve this way,
