IDolators don’t understand science

Posted by Josh Rosenau on July 24, 2007
(6)
More »

The Discovery Institute promotes a podcast in a post titled:

William Dembski Addresses Forthcoming Intelligent Design Research that Advances ID and Answers Critics

How lovely to know before it happens not only that this “research” will yield answers for his critics, but that those answers will advance his own particular beliefs. Watch him move in one paragraph from “It?s too early to tell what the impact of my ideas is on science” to “I think ID is finally in a position to challenge certain fundamental assumptions in the natural sciences about the nature and origin of information. This, I believe, will have a large impact on science.” Unless, of course, the research continues to be as unsuccessful as it’s been thus far.

Meanwhile, the DI’s Casey Luskin acknowledges that ID is creationism, and creationist brane serjun Michael Egnor claims that it is a “bad denouement” if “natural selection is true regardless of the substrate on which it acts,” claiming that this observation “impl[ies] that natural selection is a tautology.” I’m not sure why it would be a bad result to show that something is true, but I’m afraid that gravity must also be a tautology. Bad denouement.

(6)
More »

Comments

  1. #1 Mousie Cat
    July 24, 2007

    Speaking of ID “research,” whatever happened to that “Biological Institute” where ID scientists were supposed to be doing some?

  2. #2 mark
    July 25, 2007

    Mousie–I noted somewhere else that Behe, in mentioning that ID research might soon conquer drug resistance in bacteria, leaked a hint of what that research might be all about–The Power of Poof! The intrepid researchers are trying to learn how to become Poof Masters to overcome sickness, evolution, and rational thought.

  3. #3 secondclass
    July 25, 2007

    Dembski:

    It’s too early to tell what the impact of my ideas is on science.

    Translation:

    I’ve been peddling this stuff for over a decade now and there still isn’t a single scientist, or anyone else for that matter, who uses it.

  4. #4 James Kidder
    July 30, 2007

    Ah, you have been so nice to point out the elephant in the living room. No original scientific research. And as Howard van Till points out, the DI can’t even formulate decent models about evolutionary theory.

  5. #5 PTET
    January 25, 2008

    If you look at the whole quote, the interviewer is going oon about how ID has changed the world, right before Dembski hoses him down with the “too early to tell” line.

    In the same series of interviews, Behe rubbishes pro-ID alternatives to common descent.

    What’s most whacko is how much of a fantasyland the pro-ID crowd live in…

  6. #6 PTET
    January 25, 2008

    Oops – didn’t see the date on the original post. Dembski just gave an interview with a similar line about “too early to tell”. Trippy.