Posted on 02/22/2005 7:34:15 AM PST by PatrickHenry
When it's your job to serve as the president's in-house expert on science and technology, being constantly in the media spotlight isn't necessarily a mark of distinction. But for President Bush's stoically inclined science adviser John Marburger, immense controversy followed his blanket dismissal last year of allegations (now endorsed by 48 Nobel laureates) that the administration has systematically abused science. So it was more than a little refreshing last Wednesday to hear Marburger take a strong stance against science politicization and abuse on one issue where it really matters: evolution.
Speaking at the annual conference of the National Association of Science Writers, Marburger fielded an audience question about "Intelligent Design" (ID), the latest supposedly scientific alternative to Charles Darwin's theory of descent with modification. The White House's chief scientist stated point blank, "Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory." And that's not all -- as if to ram the point home, Marburger soon continued, "I don't regard Intelligent Design as a scientific topi."
[PH here:]
I'm not sure the whole article can be copied here, so please go to the link to read it all:
Chris Mooney, "Intelligent Denials", The American Prospect Online, Feb 22, 2005.
(Excerpt) Read more at prospect.org ...
1st, IF it should happen to be true, it could aid in intuitive leaps in understanding across disciplines if a common relationship, a clearer understanding of God's purpose, can be discerned. If it is false, such consideration will cost nothing.
2nd, It may serve to help reinforce faith by giving a clearer understanding of his purposes, rather than making us become more dogmatic and destroying faith when we run headlong into a wall.
Seems to me to be a win/win all around.
Yes, and that 500 million years limitation begins to look like not such a problem if the mutations were not solely random, but were guided.
2 problems.
1. The small pop. with the initial mutation is too small to have a sufficient number of mutations (per breeding individual) to get a second successful mutation to further differentiate the species.
2. The overwhelming percentage of mutations due to all causes are harmful or uselessly neutral.
Exactly why it cannot be by random chance.
BTW, you just hit on the very thing which restored my belief in God even with the knowledge that evolutionary processes take place. As I came to understand evolution more, I grew more certain it could not be by accident.
Evolutionary theory saved my faith.
LOL! Let's see...
Biologists will tell you that humans are a species of great ape. But I say we're the greatest ape.
I've whittled that one down to, "for the same reason why there shall always be an England, even though America "came from" England." (But that analogy may require too much thought for some. :-)
Does Behe ever talk about the "missing scaffolding" rebuttal?
Do you have a source for that? That's astounding (& disturbing), if true.
The assumption of regular process is the only assumption that science can work from. It's the definition of science. Make no difference what you believe the ultimate cause is.
I do believe in the idea that primitive humans probably originated about where claimed, in Africa. This comes in useful on occassion when arguing about slavery issues. I point out that slavery probably existed since the dawn of mankind, since one man could force another to do his bidding, as such, slavery originated in Africa too...
man.. liberals hate that.
Are you going to deny that scientific discoveries often came from intuitive leaps across disciplines? Intuitive leaps are of themselves, contrary to standard scientific process. If it is stupid but it works, it is not stupid.
Hypothesising is extremelyimportant in biology. But hypotheses with no experimantal or observational implications are not science.
What currently unknown fact does ID expect that evolution (natural selection) does not expect? What is the ID research program?
I've whittled that one down to, "for the same reason why there shall always be an England, even though America "came from" England." (But that analogy may require too much thought for some.
There are other ways to deal with it; but none will succeed with the people who think the "monkeys" question is an evo-killer:
1. If you have tall kids, why are you still short?
2. If you have any kids, why are you still hanging around?
3. If we are created in God's image, why is there still God?
That would be a subjective experience and is therefore, unscientific. Someone else could look at the same thing and see something totally different. Unless you can turn a subjective experience into something concrete and measurable, ID can only be considered a philosophical viewpoint. While scientific data may indeed be incorrect, it is always objective.
2. This HAS been discussed, at great length. Boils down to the fact that sexual reproduction increases the genetic variance and spread of genes. So, saying that "it can't be accounted for" is yet another indicator of ignorance on your part.
As for the last part, the Earth is about 4.5 billion (that's THOUSAND-million) years old. More than enough time.
What currently unknown fact does ID expect that evolution (natural selection) does not expect? What is the ID research program?
If anyone could tell you what unknown fact anyone hoped to find, it would not be unknown would it? I assume it could lead us into very unexpected directions, which are in fact, often the most profitable. Many of our advances have the most impact in ways we never imagined to begin with.
I would advise not basing one's faith in worldly knowledge. I think the Bible says this somewhere, but I could be misreading it.
read it carefully.. I said reinforce faith.. not form a basis for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.