Happy Intelligent Design Day!

February 15 is also Galileo's birthday.

I find the ceremonies involved in the celebration irreducibly complex, so I'll pass...

Is this the sort of wit we can expect from you upcoming book? If so, I guarantee you one sale!

I remember watching the John Frum cargo cult in my anthropology class...
Creepy.

I wish they would do more televangelising for I.D. I really do. It's going to be fun to look back in thirty years and laugh at their gross stupidity through the patina of history.

Jonathan Wells needs to do more public speaking. Get out there, Jonathan. Get out there Michael and William and Kenneth. Give it up! Don't be shy.

This isn't enough:

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2635

I want MORE! MORE! MORE!

Cargo cultism really is an apt metaphor for ID creationism, isn't it?

Actually, cargoism isn't far different to the Prosperity Gospel when you think of it; the main differnce being that, within living memory, guys in planes really did provide the cargo cultists with material goods. I don't think Benny Hinn has been as effective for his followers.

I propose April 1 as Intelligent Design Day. I think it would be even more appropriate.

I think I will continue to call it "John Frum" day, it is a funnier name on the instigating character than "Phillip E. Johnson".

An ideal time to remember Richard Feynman's words:

"But there is one feature I notice that is generally missing in cargo cult science. That is the idea that we all hope you have learned in studying science in school--we never explicitly say what this is, but just hope that you catch on by all the examples of scientific investigation. It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of
utter honesty--a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you know them. You must do the best you can--if you know anything at all wrong, or possibly wrong--to explain it. If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well
as those that agree with it. There is also a more subtle problem. When you have put a lot of ideas together to make an elaborate theory, you want to make sure, when explaining what it fits, that those things it fits are not just the things that gave you the idea for the theory; but that the finished theory makes something else come out right, in addition.

In summary, the idea is to try to give all of the information to help others to judge the value of your contribution; not just the information that leads to judgment in one particular direction or another."

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/cargocul.htm

Intelligent design theorists should not be ridiculed for demanding that science follows these simple rules.

Sugarbear - why link your "name" to the Atlanta Braves website? Have they taken an anti-evolution stance?

How about 28 November, St Jude's Day? He's the patron saint of hopeless cases.

Someday John Frum will bring a designed science of design to our cargo cultists, and then all of us godless wretches will be sorry. True, they don't do science, and occasionally even admit it, but the day will come when the proclaimed science will be revealed, if only the proper rituals are performed--like teaching Reformed John Frumism in the schools.

They need this day, as an everlasting hope that all of the insults and losses will be avenged by the as-yet-unidentified John Frum who will release all of their pent-up scientific desires when his gift-theory falls from the sky. Hope springs eternal for these sad little creatures, as nothing else ever grows in their barren deserts.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/35s39o

To some extent I agree with Sugarbear. Cargo Cults aren't a brilliant analogy for ID.

A better analogy would be a Cargo Cult operating a pretend airfield next door to an international airport while studiously ignoring the planes taking off and landing next to them and squealing about the really big plane that will be landing on there airfield any minute now.

Gosh, PZ. We get it already. Creationists aren't viewed highly by you. Ok, that's fine. Opinions are opinions.
But can we get on with the science part? Please? It seems like every other post lately is a slam against us or a rude remark in our direction.
(but then again, it does keep me coming back to your blog)

z.

Huzzah! Intelligent Design Day means that I don't have to think for the whole day.

I think I'll go play Grand Theft Auto to celebrate.

I ran across an interesting characterization of Alvin Plantinga recently over at EvolutionBlog:

Plantinga, like so many religious apologists, is a cargo-cult logician -- he uses the forms, but he doesn't actually understand their function.

I love ending of the smithsonian article:

I remind him that not only does he not have an outboard motor from America, but that all the devotees' other prayers have been, so far, in vain. 'John promised you much cargo more than 60 years ago, and none has come,' I point out. 'So why do you keep faith with him? Why do you still believe in him?'
Chief Isaac shoots me an amused look. 'You Christians have been waiting 2,000 years for Jesus to return to earth,' he says, 'and you haven't given up hope.'

Intelligent design theorists should not be ridiculed for demanding that science follows these simple rules.

Actually, Sugarbear, ID "theorists" are derided for demanding that science discontinue following these simple rules, thus to make way for their "science". Or might you, unlike your fellows, finally have some evidence for your charges?

Now come on, surely your a fine follower of Feynman, thus would never come along with a baseless charge, would never have failed to aim a sharp eye of criticism toward ID. We're dying to get some actual evidence out of you, not a posteriori claims jumping and the christening of complexity as "design".

And by the way, this:

It is interesting, therefore, to bring it out now and speak of it explicitly. It's a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of
utter honesty--a kind of leaning over backwards. For example, if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you think might make it invalid--not only what you think is right about it: other causes that could possibly explain your results; and things you thought of that you've eliminated by some other experiment, and how they worked--to make sure the other fellow can tell they have been eliminated.

is what Ross never picked up during his schooling, one of those things that scientists are supposed to learn and mentors are supposed to make sure that Ph.D candidates have learned. No, it isn't very well written into the requirements for a Ph.D, but it is what is supposed to have become engrained in Ph.D science degree recipients.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/35s39o

JLm wrt:

"why lnk yr "nm" t th tlnt Brvs wbst? Hv thy tkn n nt-vltn stnc?"

sd t ply fr th tlnt Brvs.

I propose April 1 as Intelligent Design Day. I think it would be even more appropriate.

A winner is you!

We could play "Guess the Fallacy" where we mix up a list of creationist claims with the most outrageous statements we can devise. People have to guess which is which. Maybe I can have one ready here by April.

Hey! Leave my birthday alone! (Yes, I turn 30 today)

"I propose April 1 as Intelligent Design Day. I think it would be even more appropriate.
Posted by: Orac | February 15, 2007 11:18 AM"

I'm on Orac's side...I think April 1 would be a great day for this. Also, I don't want my birthday ruined. (LOL)

That Smithsonian article on John Frum is fascinating.

But can we get on with the science part?

Who exactly is 'we'?

"Weber is not a scientist but a retired professor of business and administration at the Presbyterian Whitworth College in Spokane, Washington. He heads the Spokane chapter of Reasonstobelieve.org, a Christian organisation that seeks to challenge Darwinism."

I actually laughed out loud at my lab bench when I read this.

What fascinates me about cargo cultism is perhaps the most obvious point: It's a clear demonstration by example of how modern religions might likely have originated.

To me it's as if Benjamin Franklin is holding up a glass vessel to show how electrostatic discharge can be created by the separation of charges, while all around him the cult of the God Who Throws Holy Lightning Bolts continues to insist there's an angry man up in the clouds.

If you make a theory, for example, and advertise it, or put it out, then you must also put down all the facts that disagree with it, as well as those that agree with it.

And who says that scientists don't do this? Only the lying hypocritcal, mendacious, dishonest creationists.

In other words, can you point to any such evidence against evolution?

Gerard H - well, we meaning me I guess. But doesn't it seem like every other post by PZ lately is some snide remark towards creationists? I mean, sure we are pretty fun to pick on, but it gets kind of old after awhile.

Heh. Either way, I supposed it doesn't stop me from reading the ScienceBlogs. I just get a good laugh out of some of them.

z.

I'd like to add my vote for ID Day on April 1. Having lived 2 years in Papua New Guinea in a society that included many cargo-cultists, I'd say that as a group they're a fair notch more respectable than the IDist lot and don't deserve to have their celebrations muddied by IDology. The cargo cultists I met didn't spend their time and effort attempting to discredit science and rational thinking through focused ignoring or distorting of the evidence. It's a fool's errand that deserves appropriate recognition.

I think we should make ID Day February 29th. Give the paucity and vacuousness of their ideas, once every 4 years will be more than sufficient.

I say it should be on L. Ron Hubbard's or Deepak's birthday.

Pick the crazy or the woo.

On a side note (sorry, I'm new here). Has anyone ever noticed how similar the arguments are on ID forums compared to anti-global warming forums? I've been lurking (and posting a bit) on Red State. I thought (briefly) that I could help clear things up for some of the conservatives over there. But they all invoke the conspiracy of scientists and the closed-mindedness of us all. You could swap out the words ID for global warming and the posts would be interchangeable.

That said, I've discovered the folks at Red State have as much of a religious conviction about this as ID proponents. It's disheartening to find that there are so many irrational, anti-intellectual folks out there.

I'll end my thread hijack. Sorry.

Speaking of the Biologic Institute, exactly WHAT research are they doing there? What are they investigating? What do they expect to discern in their research? What are the possible technological applications?

I've been asking this question for weeks, and nobody seems to have any idea what the BI is doing; apparently they've just announced "We're doing research!" and that's enough for their followers.

Timcol - heh. That's actually pretty funny. You got a good hearty laugh on my end of the internet. :)

z.

I mean, sure we are pretty fun to pick on, but it gets kind of old after awhile.

No, it's sad really. That is why we have to look for the comical side.

For 'Intelligent Design Day', how about April 21? That was the day Geraldo Rivera opened Al Capone's secret vault.

I got to observe a cargo cult emerge before my very eyes (and I swear, I hardly had anything to do with it myself ... really, no kidding...).

We were in the Congo (of course) and our expedition was to be supplied by a plane carrying a bunch of supplies and a large truck to a city about five days drive away. Unforunately, when they went to put the truck on the plane, it did not fit. It was about 1 inch too wide, and it is NOT ok to squeeze something through the cargo door of an airplane...

So they took off the cargo and loaded it on the truck in Kinshasa, and a guy named Leo was going to drive the truck across the Congo to our expedition in the Western Rift Valley.

If you really know your geography, you will know there is actually not a road that goes that way. At one time there was but it relied on a number of bridges and ferry crossings that no longer exist. So Leo drove up through Congo Brazzaville, across that country, west into the Central African Republic, across that country, then south into the Congo, and across three provinces to reach us. He broke all records and it took a couple of months.

Before he arrived, we really needed the supplies, but the people who were really hurting were the 40 or so workers (mostly school teachers off duty for the summer). For instance, the truck was carrying the tents they were supposed to sleep in. As educated individuals, they were well aware of the Cargo Cult, and there we were stuck in the wild, isolated and alone, situated out of sight from but just barely in hearing-distance of a very little-used road.

In the Congo there is a tradition of making very realistic models of trucks, planes, etc. out of small pieces of wood and bamboo ... there are no toy stores, so this is instead of a Sony X-box. Well, these teachers reached back into their childhood bag of tricks and built a replica of the wayward truck and mounted it on a pole. Every few days or so we would hear a vehicle out on the road, and everyone would chant:

"Leo .... Leo ... Leeeeeooooh..."

And then the vehicle would, of course, drive by. It was never Leo.

Eventually, of course, Leo did arive, with the truck, the tents, and several cases of dried minced garlic. That last item is very funny because the main produce the people of this region grow are hops (for beer), leeks (because they will grow there) and

... wait for it ...

... Garlic!

Opinions are opinions.

then you have a lot to learn.

define:

educated opinion

for me, would ya?

I honestly thought for a moment that sugarbear had simply left out a couple of words inadvertently, and had meant to write something like "critics of intelligent design theorists should not be ridiculed for following these simple rules". That would have made more sense, but never mind.

R Clayton (#33) asks "Speaking of the Biologic Institute, exactly WHAT research are they doing there? What are they investigating? . . ."
The cargo cult scenario offers a straightforward explanation: The Biologic Institute plays the role of the decoy aircraft. Intelligent Design is clearly discernable as a hoax, simply because the abundant evidence for it seems to be nowhere in evidence. By setting up a very public Institute to carry out a secret research program, the facade might attract some positive evidentiary cargo.

There is an online BBC article up now about
the John Frum religion-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6370991.stm

From the article--

A Christian youth worker told me how he thought the cult was childish. "It's like a baby playing games," he insisted. "Those people are holding on to a dream that will never come true," he said.

I guess when you've got a lot of money, influential supporters and a "institute" doing public relations for you a religion is legit I suppose...

Hey, the 15th is MY birthday too!

I've always been happy to announce that Galileo and I share a birthday. Let's not go throwing dirt on such a wonderful date by trying to tie the day to ID as well.

Thank you,

Lesser of TWO Weevils

p.s. Larry Niven's 'Dream Park' is a wonderful book; A Murder Mystery that takes places as the main characters romp through a cargo-cult-centered, ultra-high-tech LARP (Live Action Role-Play) adventure.

I suspect most readers here already know all about Larry Niven, but if not, it's worth a read!

LotW

Intelligent Design Day should obviously be celebrated on February 30, a day recently christened by Dubya.

And we should celebrate it by contracting flesh-eating bacteria and other diseases designed by the "Great Intelligence Who Isn't God".

David Denning: The CCs also don't have the (or at least as much) benefit of modern science and networks of university libraries and labs and what not.

Steve_C: Crazy or the woo? But which is which?

Factician: It isn't so surprising when one recalls two things - one is that humans can be ignorant in several ways, so there's undoubtably commonality there. The second is just a hypothesis, but I suspect some people want to stomp out "science for everyone" because "scientists are uppity" and science promotes independent thought. This is the "stir up the crap" hypothesis I've had for a while. (Note also that the Chomsky-inspired analysis of the Iraq mess comes out to the same: there too it isn't about access but about control.)

I think I will continue to call it "John Frum" day, it is a funnier name on the instigating character than "Phillip E. Johnson".

I mean, sure we are pretty fun to pick on, but it gets kind of old after awhile.

No, it's sad really. That is why we have to look for the comical side.