1. strangerfruit
  2. Biology - it's all either math or engineering according to ID

Biology - it's all either math or engineering according to ID

By jlynch on January 11, 2007.

Earlier on today, I noticed the following by Dembski:

If I ever became the president of a university (per impossibile), I would dissolve the biology department and divide the faculty with tenure that I couldn't get rid of into two new departments: those who know engineering and how it applies to biological systems would be assigned to the new "Department of Biological Engineering"; the rest, and that includes the evolutionists, would be consigned to the new "Department of Nature Appreciation" (didn't Darwin think of himself as a naturalist?).

PZ comments here. This is worth putting side by side with Berlinski's statement about the sciences:

My real view is that there is only one science, and that is mathematics, and that the physical sciences are really forms of experimental mathematics.

And they call evolutionists "reductionist"?

Tags
In Their Own Words
Intelligent Design

More like this

The ID Tenure Plan
Now that they're quite irate about Guillermo Gonzalez failing to get tenure, the gang at the Discovery Institute seems to have forgotten Bill Dembski's radical plan for dealing with biologists. If I ever became the president of a university (per impossibile), I would dissolve the biology department…
Berlinski leaves me speechless
Berlinski's latest expectoration in his interview with himself: You talk very often of, and I quote, "the serious sciences." I take it you mean to exclude biology altogether. Is that your view? ... DB: To a certain extent. My real view is that there is only one science, and that is mathematics, and…
Do you consider medicine and the allied health professions within the STEM disciplines?
I posed this question earlier today on Twitter and have already garnered a good number of responses. STEM - science, technology, engineering, and mathematics - is the acronym used by educators, researchers, and funding agencies focused on fundamental science. The US National Science Foundation,…
Engineers Against Evolution
That really should be the theme of many pro-ID articles. Doug Moran over at Dembski's home for wayward sycophants links to this article in a University of Michigan publication about three UofM professors who are for ID. It begins by credulously citing the DI's famous "dissent from darwinism"…

There could be some merit it having a Dept. of Biological Engineering. After all an engineering approach should recognize the power of algorithms in explaining Darwinian evolution but some how I don't think that is what BillyBoy Dembski has in mind.

By CanuckRob (not verified) on 11 Jan 2007 #permalink

If Dembski ever became president of a legitimate university, it would be much better proof of God than all the rest of his drivel.

If Dembski ever became president of a legitimate university, it would be much better proof of God than all the rest of his drivel.

Hmmm. . .I think I would have a hard time believing in any God who could pontentially approve of Dembski's pathologically bad behavior.

Let's hope he ends up President of Bob Jones U then. I suspect that was what motivated the comment anyway - an attempt to get things rolling amongst his supporters.

I doubt that many of the guys at UD ever did some biological engineering especially genetic engineering. Otherwise DaveScot would have not written such BS about "the cost of mistakes".