Ben Stein v Intelligent Design: Filling in the gaps

| 34 Comments

flunked.jpgOn Bill O’Reilly, Ben Stein made the following claim:

Ben Stein Wrote:

ID is an effort to fill in the gaps, and is a sincere effort to add new knowledge to the theory.

(paraphrased)

Nice to know that ID is in the business of filling the gaps, seems that Ben Stein does realize that ID is just a variant of God of the Gaps. However, like so many other ID proponents, Ben has been misled to believe that ID adds new knowledge to the theory. It doesn’t. Did he not get Bill’s memo? Did Ben not get a copy of the Wedge document?

Bill Dembski Wrote:

As for your example, I’m not going to take the bait. You’re asking me to play a game: “Provide as much detail in terms of possible causal mechanisms for your ID position as I do for my Darwinian position.” ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. If ID is correct and an intelligence is responsible and indispensable for certain structures, then it makes no sense to try to ape your method of connecting the dots. True, there may be dots to be connected. But there may also be fundamental discontinuities, and with IC systems that is what ID is discovering.”

Since ID proponents argue, without much merit, that they are being censored, I invite them to explain on this thread to us what knowledge ID has added to science. Ideally, this would be knowledge which would not have been added to science were it not for Intelligent Design’s “revolutionary approach” which involved avoiding to deal in ‘pathetic levels of detail’.

Read more at Pharyngula

34 Comments

They showed an extended “Expelled” trailer at the Values Voters Summit last Friday where Ben Stein also spoke live.

Click here for the link to the C-SPAN video.

The lengthy clip starts at 27:22 and Stein speaks afterwards (and yes, it’s bad).

So god is diminished by every new discovery and eventually into the limit of nothingness. Of course, as Dembski points out, there are two more gaps for god to fill with every new discovery of science, the bad news is the gaps, and thus god, are becoming ever less interesting.

What a sad concept to cling to. St Augustine warned these folks not be so foolish many years ago.

St. Augustine also warned of the sin of taking part in premarital sex after taking the liberty of doing some research of his own. It’s probably best not to put too much merit in the words of any one person.

George wasn’t putting too much value on Augustine’s words, but pointing out that a prominent co-religionist of theirs, who IDers thus should know about, had warned them in the past so there’s no excuse for the IDers now. I mean, if the little known pagan Roman philosopher Lurcio had said it, it wouldn’t be so embarrassing.

And since when do we fans of science look down on someone for doing actual research before pronouncing on a matter? In that too, Augustine departed from the IDers.

ID proponent Michael Behe has done a great job of promoting science with his latest book - Edge of Evolution. Panda Thumb contributor Abbie really didn’t know much science and tried to play in Behe’s league. Dr. Behe gave her a good lesson about science on his blog at Amazon … something of a gentle spanking. Guys like Ken Miller and Dawkins are going to avoid making further comments on Behe because they get trumped by him every time they take a swing at ID.

The latest to get drubbed by Behe is Paul Gross. Behe has answered lesser known Darwinists like Kwok and Abbie but the real deal will be when the NCSE pulls out all the stops, quits hiding and tries to take on Behe with evidence of their beliefs.

Science is about measuring things. Behe’s EoE takes that idea and runs with it. When you try to measure evidence for evolution and you take guessing off the table then there is nothing but faith going for ToE – (belief in the unseen for which there is no evidence).

Panda’s Thumb people can perform a useful function … try to induce the likes of Ken Miller, Sean Carroll, Jerry Coyne (or even PZ) to take on Behe and defeat him. behe just placed a major thumping on the head of Sean Carroll on pyrimethamine in a back and forth at Science – for the full story see: http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/A3DGRQ0IO7KYQ2

So the natural next step is for Sean to run and hide from Mehe while claiming victory. Miller doesn’t even try.

Your key guys are in hiding and Behe prevails in an open discussion. Ben Stein merely makes the case how much prejudice there is against people who know more than Darwinists. O’Reilly made the point that Darwinists can’t explain origins. So only the most prejudiced and nonthinkers in our society remain closed minded and believe blindly in evolution.

Behe has shown there is insufficient evidence for anyone to believe in Darwinism but Darwinists are people of faith and hate other faiths. That’s what the Panda’s Thumb really exposes. Folks here have hatred of beliefs not in line for anything other than blind faith in evolution.

O’Reilly correctly pointed out that no one knows what created life and Darwin and derivative thoughts from his can’t explain the existence of life we see about us.

The correct position is that we don’t know but that position can’t be talked about in schools where the faith in Darwin may not be challenged. Darwinism is a state sponsored religion. Behe has shown Darwinism is faith and not science. The high priests of Darwinism are ducking Behe for fear of losing their flocks.

It is funny how the ID/creationist crowd seems to always get confused about evolution. Evolution does not directly theorize on the origin of life, rather the origin of species from common descent.

Although, it is very intersting how the study of evolution is pointing the way back to the formation of life as well. There is a very intersting paper by Wolf and Koonin on the origin of the translation system pointing to a primitive version of the Darwin-Eigen cycle.

Syntax Error: not well-formed (invalid token) at line 3, column 165, byte 258 at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.16/mach/XML/Parser.pm line 187.

“Syntax Error:”

Don’t give me that. I didn’t use any html or other special symbols.

ID proponent Michael Behe has done a great job of promoting science with his latest book - Edge of Evolution. Panda Thumb contributor Abbie really didn’t know much science and tried to play in Behe’s league. Dr. Behe gave her a good lesson about science on his blog at Amazon … something of a gentle spanking. Guys like Ken Miller and Dawkins are going to avoid making further comments on Behe because they get trumped by him every time they take a swing at ID.

A comedian :-) Denial is the first step towards recovery from ID. Abbie demolished Behe’s claim, simple as that. So what did Behe contribute to science really, beyond showing a level of ignorance about HIV and malaria?

“Syntax Error:”

was a word left out here

“Ideally, this would be knowledge which would not have been added to science were it not for Intelligent Design’s “revolutionary approach” which involved avoiding ??? to deal in ‘pathetic levels of detail’.”

Ben Major opined:

ID proponent Michael Behe has done a great job of promoting science with his latest book - Edge of Evolution. Panda Thumb contributor Abbie really didn’t know much science and tried to play in Behe’s league. Dr. Behe gave her a good lesson about science on his blog at Amazon … something of a gentle spanking. Guys like Ken Miller and Dawkins are going to avoid making further comments on Behe because they get trumped by him every time they take a swing at ID.

That is truly hilarious; i don’t know what “league” Behe is playing in, but it must be one of the fantasy ones.

If you read the 218 comments on that thread

http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/[…]6ZEH0HZZXVX4

you will see who got spanked. Various IDiots attempted to defend Behe, but they all seem to be gone now. And despite the fact that this is allegedly his blog, Behe does not even make a cameo appearance to try to rally the faithful.

St. Augustine also warned of the sin of taking part in premarital sex after taking the liberty of doing some research of his own. It’s probably best not to put too much merit in the words of any one person.

Well, he’s still more reliable than all those sexophobes who DIDN’T do any research before they opened their mouths. And either way, this is irrelevant to the obvious rightness and good sense of his comments on belief vs. science.

…nothing but faith going for ToE – (belief in the unseen for which there is no evidence).

Ben, this statement is so shamelessly dishonest (even most creationists admit there’s evidence for evolution) that nothing else you say can ever be trusted. Go back to bed and stop pretending to be an adult – you just can’t do it.

One more thing, Ben: how do you explain Behe’s total collapse at the Dover trial?

Pete Dunkelberg: Don’t give me that. I didn’t use any html or other special symbols.

You used angle brackets, which are html symbols. The proper way to use such symbols is via html entities: ‘<’ and ‘>’.

Ben lying:

ID proponent Michael Behe has done a great job of promoting science with his latest book - Edge of Evolution.

Oh look, a liar. Must be a creo. Behe’s such an embarrassing failure as a scientist that his own department has a disclaimer stating that they may have to know him because of tenure but they don’t agree with him.

BTW, Behe isn’t promoting science. Get your delusions straight. He is attacking science on the basis of a religious view his own church (Catholic) doesn’t believe.

Lots of scientists demolished Behe, including myself. Care to get into that pathetic level of detail that scientists do routinely and show where Behe got something right?

Ben Major proves that anyone can say anything, no matter how blatantly false, as long as you have access to the internet and need not fear being held accountable for your ludicrious words.

Dunk Wrote:

Don’t give me that. I didn’t use any html or other special symbols.

Yes you did:

< ? >

PS No words are missing.

Ben Major,

If Behe is so fabulous at drubbing his critics, why is the comments section at Amazon disabled? It isn’t as if he has a monumental pile of peer-reviewed papers coming out that are taking up his time.

Behe would have plenty of time to answer all his critics– if he would admit it whenever they make a valid point. Then he could change his research accordingly and actually accomplish something.

That’s how real scientists make progress. But that might shake up your prejudices, so you don’t like to see that, do you?

If Behe is so fabulous at drubbing his critics, why is the comments section at Amazon disabled? It isn’t as if he has a monumental pile of peer-reviewed papers coming out that are taking up his time.

You can still leave comments even though it claims that comments have been disabled.

So god is diminished by every new discovery and eventually into the limit of nothingness. Of course, as Dembski points out, there are two more gaps for god to fill with every new discovery of science, the bad news is the gaps, and thus god, are becoming ever less interesting.

Hey, I like that – God as a Sierpinski carpet, simultaneously approaching infinity and zero. (I know I’ve probably mangled the math on that, but you’ve got to admit that the concept is far out, man.)

Syntax Error: not well-formed (invalid token) at line 49, column 40, byte 5659 at /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.16/mach/XML/Parser.pm line 187.

Bob Couch, either post under your original name “Ben Major” or accept a move to the bathroom wall.

PvM:

Dunk Wrote:

Don’t give me that. I didn’t use any html or other special symbols.

Yes you did:

< ? >

PS No words are missing.

PvM: which involved avoiding to deal in ‘pathetic levels of detail’.

Shouldn’t this read:

which involved avoiding having to deal in ‘pathetic levels of detail’.

or perhaps

which involved avoiding dealing in ‘pathetic levels of detail’.

Mr Picky (first post - be gentle)

>You used angle brackets, which are html symbols. >The proper way to use such symbols is via html entities: ‘<’ and ‘>’. Do you guys need a hand with your perl? Get tainting turned on - it looks like you’re waiting for an injection attack.

And since when do we fans of science look down on someone for doing actual research before pronouncing on a matter? In that too, Augustine departed from the IDers.

:-) This blog is on fire today.

Ben Major:

ID proponent Michael Behe has done a great job of promoting science

Get your facts straight. Where is the peer reviewed and accepted ID science?

Panda Thumb contributor Abbie really didn’t know much science

Get your facts straight. SA Smith researches in the very science she discusses. Behe doesn’t, and it shows.

Dr. Behe gave her a good lesson about science on his blog at Amazon … something of a gentle spanking.

Get your facts straight. Behe started out with a sexist commentary, just as you do here, and pubjacked a paper just as Abbie predicted. That paper supports Abbie on the science, go and read it.

Guys like Ken Miller and Dawkins are going to avoid making further comments

Get your delusions straight. Miller and Dawkins comments on Behe all the time:

Richard Dawkins reviewing Behe's &ldquo;The Edge of Evolution&rdquo; Wrote:

I had expected to be as irritated by Michael Behe’s second book as by his first. I had not expected to feel sorry for him.

4 claims in the first paragraph, 3 false and 1 delusional. The rest of your comment is equally empty of value. But thanks for showing what a scam IDC is.

If god was an intelligent designer, why did he make creationist/IDers?

“ID proponent Michael Behe has done a great job of promoting science with his latest book - Edge of Evolution. Panda Thumb contributor Abbie really didn’t know much science and tried to play in Behe’s league. Dr. Behe gave her a good lesson about science on his blog at Amazon … something of a gentle spanking. Guys like Ken Miller and Dawkins are going to avoid making further comments on Behe because they get trumped by him every time they take a swing at ID.”

Meanwhile, back in the real world, what actually happened was that Behe himself (not directly because as far as I know he didn’t join the debate unless it was under another username, but in response to the comments he had posted), as well as various people defending him got absolutely schooled. One guy had to actually explain the basic definitions of words such as design to one of the pro ID guys as he seemed to have no grasp on what they meant.

I was as impressed with their patience as much as their scientific arguments - I would have put a chair through my computer screen in frustration if I’d been arguing with morons like that.

Science is about measuring things. Behe’s EoE takes that idea and runs with it.

1 poof = 10 minievinrudes. Oh, that’s right, Science, not ID, is about measuring things.

If god was an intelligent designer, why did he make creationist/IDers?

Because God is known for His (or Her, if He’s really is Alanis Morissette) warped sense of humor.

Because God is known for […] warped sense of humor.

As also evidenced by the duckbill platypus. :p

Henry

Hey! There is nothing funny about the platypus! It’s a beautiful animal! (I’m Aussie, by the way)

I will pray for you All.

Thanks Bill. Pray for anyone you want.

Just remember to think for yourself.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by PvM published on October 23, 2007 11:06 AM.

Reducible intelligence: Swarm Intelligence was the previous entry in this blog.

ID Exposed: Bill O’Reilly: Right for once, admits that ID is religious 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