I haven’t spoken of Michael Egnor is a long time. If you remember, he’s the DI’s pet neurosurgeon who, as many have documented, has a penchant for silly arguments. Attacking Egnor is a little like harvesting low-hanging fruit, but I couldn’t let this (lack of) logic go unnoticed ... think of it as a teaching moment.
In response to a Nature editorial on Brownback’s defense of his views on evolution, Egnor writes:
Yet if intelligent design is scientifically wrong ...then the design inference can be investigated (and, they claim, refuted) using the scientific method. Then intelligent design is science.
See? ID is science because it can be refuted using the scientific method. Just to show how silly this is, replace ID with astrology or your favorite pseudoscience.
Between Egnor and Brookfield, the design movement is in danger of becoming ridiculous. Eh, sorry ... more ridiculous.
- Log in to post comments
Actually, astrology makes fairly straightforward, testable claims. It has been tested and, of course, failed. But it can be tested.
ID doesn't make any claims that are testable in any real, meaningful way. Egnor may claim that the design intference can be tested using the scientific method, but as far as I know, no IDer has suggested a way to actually do that.