Posted on 02/22/2007 6:22:34 PM PST by Boxen
In a thought-provoking paper from the March issue of The Quarterly Review of Biology , Elliott Sober (University of Wisconsin) clearly discusses the problems with two standard criticisms of intelligent design: that it is unfalsifiable and that the many imperfect adaptations found in nature refute the hypothesis of intelligent design.
Biologists from Charles Darwin to Stephen Jay Gould have advanced this second type of argument. Stephen Jay Gould's well-known example of a trait of this type is the panda's thumb. If a truly intelligent designer were responsible for the panda, Gould argues, it would have provided a more useful tool than the stubby proto-thumb that pandas use to laboriously strip bamboo in order to eat it.
ID proponents have a ready reply to this objection. We do not know whether an intelligent designer intended for pandas to be able to efficiently strip bamboo. The "no designer worth his salt" argument assumes the designer would want pandas to have better eating implements, but the objection has no justification for this assumption. In addition, Sober points out, this criticism of ID also concedes that creationism is testable.
A second common criticism of ID is that it is untestable. To develop this point, scientists often turn to the philosopher Karl Popper's idea of falsifiability. According to Popper, a scientific statement must allow the possibility of an observation that would disprove it. For example, the statement "all swans are white" is falsifiable, since observing even one swan that isn't white would disprove it. Sober points out that this criterion entails that many ID statements are falsifiable; for example, the statement that an intelligent designer created the vertebrate eye entails that vertebrates have eyes, which is an observation.
This leads Sober to jettison the concept of falsifiability and to provide a different account of testability. "If ID is to be tested," he says, "it must be tested against one or more competing hypotheses." If the ID claim about the vertebrate eye is to be tested against the hypothesis that the vertebrate eye evolved by Darwinian processes, the question is whether there is an observation that can discriminate between the two. The observation that vertebrates have eyes cannot do this.
Sober also points out that criticism of a competing theory, such as evolution, is not in-and-of-itself a test of ID. Proponents of ID must construct a theory that makes its own predictions in order for the theory to be testable. To contend that evolutionary processes cannot produce "irreducibly complex" adaptations merely changes the subject, Sober argues.
"When scientific theories compete with each other, the usual pattern is that independently attested auxiliary propositions allow the theories to make predictions that disagree with each other," Sober writes. "No such auxiliary propositions allow … ID to do this." In developing this idea, Sober makes use of ideas that the French philosopher Pierre Duhem developed in connection with physical theories – theories usually do not, all by themselves, make testable predictions. Rather, they do so only when supplemented with auxiliary information. For example, the laws of optics do not, by themselves, predict when eclipses will occur; they do so when independently justified claims about the positions of the earth, moon, and sun are taken into account.
Similarly, ID claims make predictions when they are supplemented by auxiliary claims. The problem is that these auxiliary assumptions about the putative designer's goals and abilities are not independently justified. Surprisingly, this is a point that several ID proponents concede.
###
Sober, Elliott. "What is Wrong with Intelligent Design," The Quarterly Review of Biology: March 2007.
Since 1926, The Quarterly Review of Biology has been dedicated to providing insightful historical, philosophical, and technical treatments of important biological topics.
Just like evolution.
So, we're talking about decay rates - and you refer to the Bible. Which chapter? Which verse?
What part of my statement are you having difficulty with?
Is there any writngs in the world that span thousands of years that refer to anyone person as they do Christ? Thats history!
It is widely understood that people were greatly more moral than they are today! you wont drag me into such a ridiculous argument because there is no argument. Everyone with any common sense knows this. Peace!
In a vaccum!
Give me a break coyoteman! What was I thinking? they already proved it in 1830! 1830? What sophistication!
Not arrogance, physics - to measure the decay rate, you don't have to wait until half of the element vanished ..
Element half life decay rates have been studied for less than one percent of their decay time, this is nothing in time.
You're fixated on the term "half time" ...
The intensity of the magnetic field is approximately 1400 years, the magnitude is approximately 700 years, with approximately 150 years of study of this phenomena we know between 10 to 20 percent about the field.
What does this mean? Intensity, measured in years? I don't get it - have you left out something?
Evolutionist use nothing but circular reasoning which is self perpetuating! Thats how and nothing else that they come up with for an old earth. Dating dont prove it (i.e.(carbon/argon/geologic column) evolutionists use continius circular logic to adamantaly "prove" their previously determined outcome, because of the preference of those who develop and maintain their philosophical system.
No global flood you say?
Polystrate fossils--- found all over the globe with roots broken off. Rupkes observation.
Fossils--- usually have to be covered quickly by catastrophic means. rapid petrafication of wood.
Clastic dikes--- they go right through horizontal sedimentary strata
Mt St. Helens---which created canyons 17 miles long and up to 140ft deep in hours
Paolouse Canyon--- 300 to 500 ft deep. in 1-2 days
shows that it doesnt take long to create canyons!
Spontaneus sorting of layers-
Turbidity currents-
Extensive strata and pancake layering-
They found whale skeletons in michigan 440 ft above sea level and in vermont 500ft above sea level in montreal quebec 600 ft above sea level.
Marine fossils in the mountains---
Frozen Mamoths---
Fissure in the rocks---
Erratic boulders---
Black sea speaks---
worldwide chaos and out of order fossils---
Dr. John R. Hornet--- in digging for dinosaurs stated judging from the various pits there were thirty million fossil fragments in that area, at a conservitive estimate, we had discovere the tomb of 10,000 dinosaurs. There was a flood. This was no ordinary spring flood from one of the streams in the area but acatastrophic inundation... that our best explanation. it seems to make the best sense, and on the basis of it we believe this was a living, breathing group of dinosaurs destroyed in one catastrophic moment.
All the other flood stories spun off the original.
massive sedimentation---
Dolostone beds---
Chert beds---
Congomerlate---
massive volcanism---
Evidence of significent of past global changes---
Grand canyon monument to global flood--- flat beds instead of v shaped out of order column which this isnt the only place that occurs.
sedimentary rock clearly visisble at the top of Mt everest. And it goes on and on!!!!!!
Theres all kinds of studies being done showing that once believed constants may prove untrue and are showing great evidence to this, you realy should catch up! Peace!
Its called evidence and the things you have stated have been shown the evidence greatly against it.
And it all refers to you comment about creating your own supposed goodness which this is all it comes down to for you! It is known through out the history of the world that those in societies who followed after the moral spoken of in the bible lived much healthier lifestyles and those who disregarded morals in time soon found catastrophy this is historical fact, many were destroyed suddenly and if you look at all known imoral places today they are sitting right in great catastrophical potential areas. Makes you wonder! Pompei, Jericho, Sodom , Gomorah, San Fransisco, New orleans, Indonesia, Roman Empire etc...etc...
There is no other place than America that has been known for there Christian founding and roots (yes we have made mistakes) but by enlarge we have been greatly christian rooted and have also been the most blessed nation on the face of the earth in only approx. 240 years compared to the thousand year histories of other places. Makes you wonder! etc...etc...
For the lurkers, here are a few links which may be of interest:
Problems with a Global Flood, Second Edition, by Mark Isaak
Another bold statement... You really should provide evidence! Please!
No lurkers have to be conned by your propaganda! By saying oh you lurkers out there who I coyoteman would love to propagandise look up my websites Ive picked out for you, What a propaganda machine you evolutionists are! What I say is look at all the evidence, and you will see the evidence is overwhelmingly against evolution. Just look at all the evidence, thats all! My resources are from highly regarded scientist who USE to be evolutionists. But they got off their high horse! and started looking honestly! Peace!
Do they do the type of "science" the Creation Research Society advocates? That organization has the following on its website:
The Creation Research Society is a professional organization of trained scientists and interested laypersons who are firmly committed to scientific special creation. The Society was organized in 1963 by a committee of ten like-minded scientists, and has grown into an organization with an international membership.
CRS Statement of Belief All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief:
1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths.2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.
3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in its extent and effect.
4. We are an organization of Christian men and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior.
Does this sound like science to you? Does this sound like research?
Any time preconceived beliefs, such as these, override the scientific method, an individual is doing (or teaching) apologetics (defense of religion), not science. It doesn't matter what scientific degrees one may have; to agree to a set of standards such as these, which is common (whether explicit or implicit) in creationist circles, is to cease doing science and move into the realm of apologetics.
Just for one among many USA TODAY.com and from a liberal source at that, Scientists question natures fundemental laws. Micheal Murphy University of Cambridge, and the list goes on and on and on! Like I said you realy should catch up! Peace!
That isnt were I get my resources! I get them from all sorts of scientists who use to be evolutionists. Bunches of them! peace! They say that evolution should not be taught as fact, and that ALL evidence should be shown and not censored like evolutionists do in peer reviews media schools etc...etc... and the reason they censor is because if all the evidence was shown it would clearly show evolution doesnt hold water! Peace friend!
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.