ID in a Nutshell

| 76 Comments

Over at Uncommon Descent, Wm. Dembski has a blog titled “Paley updated and videoized” :

August 9, 2006 Paley updated and videoized

Kids growing up watching this video are going to find it harder later in life to swallow Darwinian evolution:

http://www.kids4truth.com/watchmaker/watch.html Filed under: Intelligent Design — William Dembski @ 10:49 am

After watching the video, I clicked the “Learn more about The Watchmaker” button, and found a surprisingly clear statement of what “Intelligent Design” (ID) is, in a nutshell:

We believe the [Intelligent Design] movement is helpful to the Biblical Creationism movement because it causes people to see the lunacy of the Theory of Evolution.

paley.jpg

By George - I think they got it! (And from the way Dembski is pumping the video on his blog, one must assume he approves…)

It’s not that Creationism led to Scientific Creation, which led to Intelligent Design, which led to “Evidence Against Evolution” - it’s that Creationism IS “Evidence Against Evolution.”

Here are some more tidbits from “Learn more about The Watchmaker”:

What is The Watchmaker’s message?

We are hoping that this presentation causes you to acknowledge that there is one true Creator God and to inquire as to Who this God is.

Jeremiah 29:13 – And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. …

Who is The Watchmaker?

We believe that the “Watchmaker” is the triune God of the Old and New Testaments of Scripture, and has revealed Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ. We believe that Jesus Christ is fully man and fully God, and is truly “Lord over all.” …

What is the difference between the theory of Intelligent Design and Biblical Creationism?

ID (Intelligent Design) Theory simply tries to show mathematically what is already intuitively obvious – that organisms in nature were designed. The theory does not make an attempt to identify who the Intelligent Designer is, although many ID theorists would identify themselves as Christians of some type. We believe the movement is helpful to the Biblical Creationism movement because it causes people to see the lunacy of the Theory of Evolution. This in turn shows them the wisdom of believing in a Creator, which can encourage them to read the Bible and come to know their Creator. You can learn more about the ID movement by visiting www.discovery.org and www.uncommondescent.com.

76 Comments

WOW. It’s like they’re giving up any last shred of pretense.

It sort of brings to mind the bank robber who scribbles his “hand over the cash” note on the back of an envelope that has his name and address on the other side.

Just happened on to this web sight. Wow, we have come along way in 81 years. In 1925 a teacher in Dayton Tn is found guilty of teaching evolution and now creation science or I.D. is totally made fun of. I am not even an amateur student of science or apologetics but I have enough since to know that we did not come from monkeys. Why is there not life on other planets? How is it that we are perfectly distanced from the Sun so as not to burn up or freeze. How is it that the earth is running down instead of getting better if evolution is true. Evolution certainly is a religion - it takes more faith than to believe in I. D. When mankind rejects the love and authority of God, he sets himself up as god and therefore must come up with an alternative to how we got here.

Just thought I would throw in my two cents. Thanks - David Williams, Tennessee

I wouldn’t be so smug about the IDers dropping any pretense of not being motivated by Creationism.

Given the current state and trend of the U. S. Supreme Court, in a dozen years or so, they’ll do away with the doctrine of Separation of Church and State, and public schools will be freely allowed to teach religious ideas, including Creationism, as fact.

In another dozen years, the general public will have forgotten what all the opposition against Creationism was about, and only a minority of real science-minded people will be left to carry real scientific ideas.

Given the current state and trend of the U. S. Supreme Court, in a dozen years or so, they’ll do away with the doctrine of Separation of Church and State, and public schools will be freely allowed to teach religious ideas, including Creationism, as fact.

I very much doubt that.

As an effective political movement, creationism/ID is dead, as is fundamentalist Christianity in general. Their glory days are over.

WOW. It’s like they’re giving up any last shred of pretense.

Well, they’ve already shot their “ID isn’t religion” load in court, and lost.

No point in maintaining the pretense any longer, is there. Now they can safely proclaim their religious goals openly, just like ICR did after they lost THEIR court case.

That it’s all about getting to the kids without, of course, any sort of critical analysis also seems to please Dembski to no end. The pretense about giving both sides disappears the moment it isn’t needed to shoehorn religion into the schools.

Reportedly AFDave, who was here a short while before being sent off (to AtBC) to stonewall and distort evidence for the past few months (130+ pages so far) had a hand in repeating that old bit of nonsense in a more modern form.

I think they are tending to give up the pretense, but certainly not the efforts to poison minds to science before it has even been learned.

Glen D http://tinyurl.com/b8ykm

And Dembski and his acolytes claim that ID has nothing to do with religion?????

I’ve read better doggerel on bathroom walls, and even written some when roasting friends, but to use it as religious propaganda is obscene.

And, David, welcome to Panda’s Thumb. You need not have told us that you are “…not even an amateur student of science…” since that’s abundantly clear from the rest of your comment. Before commenting in any way about science, you should at least read some basic books on the subject. If you did so, you’re less likely to attract derision.

David Williams wrote:

“I am not even an amateur student of science or apologetics but I have enough since to know that we did not come from monkeys.”

And enough sense to use the word ‘since’ correctly?

“Why is there not life on other planets?”

How do you know there isn’t?

“How is it that we are perfectly distanced from the Sun so as not to burn up or freeze.”

If there are millions of planets out there (and there probably are), why couldn’t at least a few others also be at that perfect distance? And we won’t always be at that ‘perfect’ distance. Then maybe it could be another planet’s turn.

“How is it that the earth is running down instead of getting better if evolution is true.”

If the earth is running down, then why is god letting it happen?

“When mankind rejects the love and authority of God, he sets himself up as god and therefore must come up with an alternative to how we got here.”

Could you point out when or where man has set himself up as god?

Father Wolf wrote:

“Given the current state and trend of the U. S. Supreme Court, in a dozen years or so, they’ll do away with the doctrine of Separation of Church and State, and public schools will be freely allowed to teach religious ideas, including Creationism, as fact.”

Would that also include religions like Islam, Hinduism, Raelism and Scientology? Or would there only be YOUR version of religion being taught? You don’t like the freedom the consititution gives you? You just trying to live up to your aggressive namesake?

“In another dozen years, the general public will have forgotten what all the opposition against Creationism was about, and only a minority of real science-minded people will be left to carry real scientific ideas.”

And which REAL science might that be?

Two DONUT posts like this in a row, and I’m sensing echoes of Casey Powell here. (a.k.a. Dr Morgan, Dr Greenwood, Dr Griffin etc)

Lenny Wrote:

As an effective political movement, creationism/ID is dead, as is fundamentalist Christianity in general. Their glory days are over.

You are surely quite right about IDC, but fundamentalist Christianity? They may have jumped some sort of shark in that there was a point at which they were more directly powerful than they are right now today, and there are some things which could reasonably lead one to suspect their power will decline in the near future, but at this exact moment I think that really the only problem that fundamentalist Christianity as a political movement has is that they’ve been so successful at achieving their goals over the last six years that it’s finally beginning to generate a backlash. This isn’t really such a bad position to be in.

Keanus Wrote:

Before commenting in any way about science, you should at least read some basic books on the subject. If you did so, you’re less likely to attract derision.

This is good advice. Also, I would suggest reading up on comma rules. And don’t trust spellcheckers so much; they are prone to missing subtle errors like “web sight” or “I have enough since”.

Originally saw this animation linked from here:

http://www.fstdt.com/comments.asp?id=13451

They weren’t impressed either. But some did at least find it ‘cute’.

And while you’re on the KIDS4truth site, don’t forget to play the PLAGUE game! :-)

David Williams, Tennesee

I am not even an amateur student of science or apologetics

Well, clearly you’re not the first, but give yourself a little credit for the second.

I have enough since to know that we did not come from monkeys.

Cents, scents, sense, and since: life is certainly full of tough choices that we can easily get wrong, especially when we don’t know very much and aren’t willing to put any effort into study.

we did not come from monkeys

Nope, we’re much more closely related to our chimpanzee, gorilla, and bonobo cousins, none of whom are monkeys. (Although we didn’t “come from” these apes either, we did share a common ancestor with them six or seven million years ago. You do realize that that’s a much longer time than six or seven thousand years, don’t you? Do you think it’s easier to produce the same amount of diversity of life in a shorter or a longer time period?) Monkeys are much more distant relatives, of course. Of most of us, anyway. In your case, though, maybe the monkeys would be willing to make an exception.

Why is there not life on other planets?

How do you know? Have you been to all of them? We keep finding new planets, in case you haven’t heard, but most of them are pretty far away. Do you know how long a “light year” is?

Humans have only landed on one celestial body beyond our own planet, the moon. We have landed unmanned exploratory craft on a relative handful fo others–Mars, Venus, and Titan. Of these, the jury is still out on two (bonus points if you can guess which one is least likely to harbor life).

To the extent that you are relying on the apparent lack of evidence of life turned up by our exploratory craft so far, you are giving credit to the thousands of rocket scientists and exo-biologists who have enabled and interpreted those findings. Why place your trust in them, with their relative paucity of distant and hard-to-retrieve evidence, but not in our earthbound biologists, with their comparative treasure trove of easily-accessed data?

How is it that the earth is running down instead of getting better if evolution is true.

How is it that your drivel and drool is running down, instead of getting better? Oh, you apparently know so little of evolution that you believe it’s progressive and targeted on a higher goal–that old Ladder-of-life thing. If I thought you could actually read, I’d be tempted to direct you to a collection of long-refuted creationist fallacies, just like this one. But that would be a waste of your time and your limited mental resources.

Evolution certainly is a religion - it takes more faith than to believe in I. D. When mankind rejects the love and authority of God, he sets himself up as god and therefore must come up with an alternative to how we got here.

Oh, I thought you came here to talk about science. Now I see where you’re coming from. Gee, what a surprise! Though it does seem to me that people who pompously regale others about the existence and intent of unevidenced supernatural creator-spirits fit a good deal more closely into the setting-self-up-as-god pigeonhole.

Just thought I would throw in my two cents.

Hey, you guessed right that time! But then, even a broken clock gives the correct time twice a day…

In soft calming tones set to meter and verse, The Idiots lie and do things so much worse. They pander to youth so wide-eyed and pure To fill waning ranks of fundies, I’m sure.

They can’t do the science and their faith is so shallow, They’d best corrupt young minds before there is no one that follows. Belief in the unproven is faith, shall we agree? Nature’s revelation of truth is through science, don’t you see?

“How is it that we are perfectly distanced from the Sun so as not to burn up or freeze.”

Here’s some other stuff I’ve been wondering about.

* Why were so many famous people like George Washington and Martin Luther King Jr. born on holidays?

* Isn’t it an amazing coincidence that flies are called flies, since they’re so good at flying?

Darth Robo, I may be wrong, but I think you’re misinterpreting the quote from Father Wolf,

“Given the current state and trend of the U. S. Supreme Court, in a dozen years or so, they’ll do away with the doctrine of Separation of Church and State, and public schools will be freely allowed to teach religious ideas, including Creationism, as fact.

In another dozen years, the general public will have forgotten what all the opposition against Creationism was about, and only a minority of real science-minded people will be left to carry real scientific ideas.”

(my bold) To me, FW is bemoaning current Supreme Court trends, saying that if the creationists win, we won’t be doing much real science. I don’t think he likes the idea.

On the other hand, David Williams’ post looks like a caricature of creationist garbage. I’d even say that it’s a spoof, but as has been noted many times, it’s hard to tell the real thing from the spoofs.

In every attempt to repeal the scientific revolution there comes the moment when the reactionaries realize they aren’t going to win and turn their enterprise into a way of extracting money from the stupider part of their audience. Like many a previous demogogue, Demsky is abandoning politics for mail fraud. Well, it’s a living.

Julie Stahlhut Wrote:

Here’s some other stuff I’ve been wondering about.

* Why were so many famous people like George Washington and Martin Luther King Jr. born on holidays?

* Isn’t it an amazing coincidence that flies are called flies, since they’re so good at flying?

And oranges. They’re ORANGE. How mush CSI is that right there?

I predict that within 12 months Dembski will be peddling this s–t* on late night infomercials.

*-edited for vulgarity.

That was really creepy.

If they had just stopped at one gear that floated around for 50 million years that would be ok, I guess.

The highways and cables thing made me sick

You are surely quite right about IDC, but fundamentalist Christianity?

Yes. The fundies have never had, and will never get, a better chance to implement all of their social agenda than they have had for the past six years. Their pals in the Republicrat Party dominate the White House, both chambers of the Congress, and most of the judiciary. They can, quite literally, pass anything they want, and no one can stop them — not the Democans, not the Libertarians, not the Independents, nobody.

And yet they have not passed a single part of the fundie social agenda.

Why not? They don’t WANT to. They know that the fundie agenda has no popular support whatsoever, none, zip, zero, zilch, nada. Not a shred. And it would be political suicide to pass any of it. Not to mention that the corporados run the Republicrat Party (as they always have) and the corporados don’t want a theocracy – it’s bad for business.

Hence, the Republicrats treat the fundies the same way the Democans treat the, uh, “labor movement”. They make speeches for them, they pat them on the back, they take their money, they take their votes, and then they don’t do jacks–t* for them.

As an effective political movement, the fundies are dead. The Republicrats will continue to give them lip service, and not much else. And, as the recent vote on stem cell research shows, many of them are no longer willing to give them even lip service when it becomes a liability.

The fundies are dead. The Repubs might walk the stiffened corpse around at fundraisers, a la Weekend at Bernie’s, but we can already see the flies buzzing around.

*-edited for vulgarity.

In every attempt to repeal the scientific revolution there comes the moment when the reactionaries realize they aren’t going to win and turn their enterprise into a way of extracting money from the stupider part of their audience.

Just like ICR did after they got crushed in Arkansas and Louisiana.

Once again, we see that ID simply isn’t doing anything new. Everything they’ve done – absolutely everything – was already done decades ago by the creation ‘scientists’.

Same poop, different toilet. (shrug)

“How is it that we are perfectly distanced from the Sun so as not to burn up or freeze.”

The habitable zone is quite extensive now, with new discoveries on extremophiles and water sources. That much “perfect distance” is AFAIK hard to miss by models of planet formation.

This would appear to be a simple attempt at re-consolidating the DI base. Pull the flock back together, so to speak. ID *is* creationism, but with arithmetic. Come on back in and support ID, all of you creationists who have become disgusted with our recent failures. We are really on the same side!

I am not even an amateur student of science or apologetics but I have enough since to know that we did not come from monkeys.

You left out a word. Enough what? Ignorance? Foolishness? Pigheadness? Blindness? Arrogance? Religious indoctrination?

Even the bombardier beetle makes a cameo! My, how quaint and predictable these creationists are.

By the way, this video part of a lesson taken from the creation science PhD program. They make it sound as if it’s only a bedtime fable for children, but this really is as technical and “advanced” as ID/creationist arguments get.

“The habitable zone is quite extensive now, with new discoveries on extremophiles and water sources. That much “perfect distance” is AFAIK hard to miss by models of planet formation.”

Which is, of course, ironclad evidence that the laws that govern planetary formation were specifically designed to support life. Which is even *better* evidence of a Creator! Who is then obviously the God of the Christian Bible, because I say so.

The part I like best is how at the end they stay so true to form.

“…you can download the self running file for $5 in our secure store.”

Even if I were a Xtian, I think I would get tired of the perpetual scam eventually.

Anyone want to take any bets on how long it will be before Dembski posts “Bananas: The Atheist’s Nightmare.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of90[…]&search=

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!

This is so mind-pummelingly offensive, stupid, and just plain wrong I could only watch the first few seconds.

What a study in contrasts. Compare this simplistic rhyming lie with the actual work that was done as shown in PZ’s posting of “Regulatory Evolution of the Hox1 Gene”.

Poor smooth-brained fundies. Maybe they could get a job writing lyrics for Bryan Adams.

I tried to look at kids4truth.com from my work computer and ran into a problem:

Request Blocked by URL Filter Database ——————————————————————————– Date: 10/Aug/2006:04:49:32 +0000 Host: XXXXXXXXXX URL: http://www.kids4truth.com/watchmaker/watch.html Category: Pornography Client IP: xx.xx.xx.xx UserName: XXXX Version: Webwasher 5.2 Build 1781 Database S/N: XXXX Policy: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Reason: Your request to URL “http://www.kids4truth.com/watchmaker/watch.html”; has been blocked by the Webwasher URL filter database. The URL is listed in categories (Pornography) which are not allowed by your administrator at this time.

Hmmm.… kids 4 truth .… pornography .… No time to investigate further. I’d better report Dembski to homeland security right now.

To me, FW is bemoaning current Supreme Court trends, saying that if the creationists win, we won’t be doing much real science. I don’t think he likes the idea.

Yes, indeed. Darth Robo may have been misled by the neutral term “freely”

Dr. Lenny and others are optimistic that the current golden age of fundamentalism is drawing to a well-deserved close. However, I work with too many far-right-wing religious nuts to be so optimistic.

Dave Thomas Wrote:

Well, there’s this one, and then there’s Pearl Jam.

I’m actually serious (for once). We’re supposed to be smarter than those dimwits, right? And yet they’re the ones with the (you have to admit) good-looking animation.

Why don’t we have something equally appealing based on, I don’t know, Darwin’s five tenets of evolution (as promoted by Mayr)? We have to have something to throw back at the fundies, surely?

[Why don’t we have something equally appealing based on, I don’t know, Darwin’s five tenets of evolution (as promoted by Mayr)? We have to have something to throw back at the fundies, surely?]

I seriously think that there’s still some work to be done on our PR.

On the other hand, we could simply let the IDiots keep shooting themselves in the face for us. Hmm.…

Make that Mr. Williams, not Mr. Thomas.

Why are P’s G and AnonCow sniping at each other? Are we still in grade school?

“Well, he started it!” Come on, somebody take the high road and act like a grown-up, here.

What a lot of commentary over a presentation that uses an argument that one of the creators of ID has publicly admitted is bankrupt.

The Paley’s Watch parable is presented in ID as “irreducible Complexity.”

Michael Behe has admitted in “Reply to my Critics” that irreducible complexity fails to address the central task of natural selection.

It has nothing to do with evolution! Using an argument which claims to discredit evolution (while actually having nothing to do with it) with the intended purpose of proving Creationism is like me arguing that Jimmy’s bait box is full of minnows because my motorcycle needs a quart of oil. There are *two* complete and total disconnects between the argument and its conclusion.

AHEM

I have moved the shrill squabble between Popper’s Ghost and Anonymous Coward over to The Bathroom Wall where it belongs.

You could save me some trouble by duking it out over there.

Dave

“Even if I were a Xtian, I think I would get tired of the perpetual scam eventually.” ————————–

I used to live in N. Texas, and I had to drive down to Houston once a month or so. When I got bored, I’d switch over to one of the religious radio stations and watch the dashboard clock to see how long it took them to ask for money. I never made it to 10 minutes. I DO think they’re sincere, but it seems an oddly profitable business, doesn’t it? People will buy anything, it seems, to support the team. Take the Left Behind books, for example. What bothers me isn’t just the repugnant or bizarre theology, but that the books are so badly written. People buy this stuff? I understand why people have faith in God, though I don’t share their faith, but I don’t understand why they’ll shill out their money for any book, cd, trinket, bumper sticker, book jacket, or t-shirt to show the world that they’re proud to be a Christian. I call it “me too” Christianity, or “bumper sticker” Christianity, depending on how sour my mood is.

gregonomic Wrote:

I’m actually serious (for once). We’re supposed to be smarter than those dimwits, right? And yet they’re the ones with the (you have to admit) good-looking animation.

Why don’t we have something equally appealing based on, I don’t know, Darwin’s five tenets of evolution (as promoted by Mayr)? We have to have something to throw back at the fundies, surely?

Well, the ID movement iswas the PR front of the whole Creationist culture, so you’ve got to figure they’d have a few tricks up their sleeves even after all this time. Evolution, compared to Creationism, does have kind of a monopoly on PBS, the BBC, Nat Geo, and the Discovery channels with all their cinematic programming on the topic. Even Carl Sagan’s Cosmos has a lot of time devoted to the evolution of life. IDtionists have a rhyming Flash animation. Why the video envy now? But I do like the idea of the approach. Anybody know some nerdy animators who could be put up to the task?

The Watchmaker’s Message is this: “We love analogies, even when those analogies aren’t really legitimate because they break down when compared to the real world natural processes we’re applying them to.” (Incidentally, did you notice that the hills 4 billion years ago were green???)

Also, the fact that IDists can’t bring themselves to disavow the blatant pseudoscience of young earth creationist propaganda, and the fact that some of the fellows of the so-called “Center for Science & Culture” are known advocates of young earth creationism, demonstrates that their very name, “Center for Science,” is nothing more than Orwellian guile.

IDtionists have a rhyming Flash animation. Why the video envy now? But I do like the idea of the approach. Anybody know some nerdy animators who could be put up to the task?

You guys need to explore a bit more, don’t take the creobots word for anything.

Of course there have been flash animations made which make the creobots’ look like what they are, elementary school efforts.

example here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/s[…]y/index.html

which also leads to a nice little mock-up of Endler’s field experiments, in which users can modify the data (limited) and see how the results would differ.

personally, I was very happy to see John Endler’s work used in such a way. He was a prof of mine at UCSB, and I still find his field work on the evolution of secondary characteristics in poecilliids to be second to none.

also see here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/d[…]n/index.html

there are some other nicely done animations on that site as well.

they’re around, if you look for them.

Actually I’ve had the guppies link in my Evolution Favorites folder for a while now, but you know how that’s just changes within a species, it obviously isn’t producing “new information.” *eye roll* And none of these rhyme! That’s the important part if we’re supposed to “raise” our children on these! We need a cute little nursery rhyme to compete the the fairy-tale arguments of ID.

oh, terribly sorry old boy! I missed the rhyming part.

*sigh*

I’m no poet, but if you find one, i’d be happy to do the flash animations myself (I do have a talent in that area).

Maybe you ARE a POET and you just don’t KNOW IT! ;)

Glen Davidson…

Reportedly AFDave, who was here a short while before being sent off (to AtBC) to stonewall and distort evidence for the past few months (130+ pages so far) had a hand in repeating that old bit of nonsense in a more modern form.

Had a hand in it? Yes, you might say that. I wrote the poem and came up with the concept for the illustrations. There will be more coming, BTW. Wanna come examine a brain such as mine? Hop on over to AtBC to my “Creator God Hypothesis” … we’re having a good time.

Wanna come examine a brain such as mine?

Wear gloves.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Dave Thomas published on August 9, 2006 7:15 PM.

Wells vs tiny flies was the previous entry in this blog.

Seattle Times congratulates Kansas is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter