Total Drek

Or, the thoughts of several frustrated intellectuals on Sociology, Gaming, Science, Politics, Science Fiction, Religion, and whatever the hell else strikes their fancy. There is absolutely no reason why you should read this blog. None. Seriously. Go hit your back button. It's up in the upper left-hand corner of your browser... it says "Back." Don't say we didn't warn you.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

They Keep Pulling Me Back In

Hi Drekkers.

A new volley in the culture wars was made in my local deep south newspaper last week, and this time it was concerned one of this site's all-time favorite topics: Intelligent Design. Well, being an avid Drek reader, as well as an occasional contributor, I felt overwhelmingly compelled to reply and reasonably well-armed to do so.

Well I did, and they printed it today, so... for whatever it's worth I thought I'd share Sisyphean pursuits with y'all. (DAMN! I mean "you").

So, I was faced with this unprovoked attack on reason last week:

All signs point to intelligent design

Why teach evolution with a closed mind?

It is one thing to accept the observations of science and another to blindly accept the non-observed, unproven and down-right impossible evolutionary model claimed as science. Granted, evolutionary viewpoints are uncomfortable to creationists, but there is actually less science in them than in the scientific creation model.

There is more information found in the DNA of the ‘simple’ living cell than contained in more than 20 million pages of an encyclopedia, and it didn’t write itself. With any design we know there must be a designer.

Common descent does not necessarily point only to evolution but also to a common designer of every kind of living thing. Evolution has only produced horizontal change within a kind or species and has never produced an upward change or a new kind.

To produce an upward change or new kind would require additional DNA information and that has never been found or observed. Found only are mutations, better known as birth defects, and they are always negative and detrimental to a species.

The designs of the ‘simple’ cell and the computer both contain information. We know that the computer did not happen by a big bang at Radio Shack and we should know the jump from chemicals to living organisms containing information could not occur without the help of a designer.

The only evolutionary transitional form ever found is a fish with legs on an evolutionist’s bumper sticker.

Ok. so what was I to do? Remember, 1) letters to the editor are limited to 250 words, and 2) I don't have a gun and don't know where this guy lives.
So, this is what I sent. I hope it's what Drek would have:

Pointing Away from Intelligent Design

To reasonably address all the unfounded statements based on tortured logic and fundamental misconceptions in Tom Weir’s letter hyping “Intelligent Design” (ID) would take far more space than this forum provides. The evolutionary tenet that complex things arise occasionally from simple things is both demonstrable and documented. It is also a fundamental paradigm of biology as we know it.

There may at some level be a “designer”, but theorizing so is like saying Jack Frost makes snowflakes. True, snowflakes are seemingly complex and beautiful, but that does not imply intelligence– and nature is far better understood without imagining it has a personality driving it. Scientists have overwhelmingly accepted this principle. That is why we don’t teach the “Jack Frost theory” in schools.

ID is not “science” by any definition we have. If readers are swayed by the ID argument, they owe it to themselves to look up some of the many critiques and debunkings of its assertions (see, e.g., before they side with what amounts to a conspiracy theory or a fairy tale.

Not my best work, maybe, but I had to send it off quick.
The most encouraging thing was the call I got from the editor. They do this to check that you’re in fact a local resident. But the guy who called me seemed genuinely curious who I was – when I moved here, where I worked, etc. He ended the call by unsarcastically thanking me for providing an “enlightened” viewpoint. How ‘bout that? It got published 5 days later.


Blogger kristina b said...

Thank you for your contribution to keeping our world out of the dark ages. Every little bit counts.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008 7:55:00 AM  
Blogger Marf said...

Explaining the existence of life by saying something even more complicated and unlikely (God) created it solves nothing.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:32:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Site Meter