|
Christians'
not-so-intelligent design theory
"The
theory of intelligent design" is the
most unintelligent hogwash to come out of
the Christian realm since the Scopes monkey
trials. The entire concept is a staggering
monument to anti-intellectualism.
To
say you believe in such an idea is to immediately
identify yourself with an ideology so far
to the fringe that you should be hauled
away to the nuthouse, post-haste.
Intelligent
design says the world is so complicated
and so perfectly ordered that it must have
been made by a higher power. It is often
referred to as a "theory," and
its supporters argue that it should be presented
in biology schoolbooks as an accompaniment
to the theory of evolution. If it sounds
like a backdoor way to argue creationism,
that's because it is.
The
problem with such base stupidity is that
design-loving Christians are using the word
"theory," but what they have is,
at best, a "hypothesis." Even
that is generous.
A
theory is a testable, reproducible idea
that can produce measurable data. A hypothesis
is an idea that can be examined by experiment,
and that is where the generosity of the
previous paragraph kicks in.
You
cannot empirically prove the existence of
God. To say an idea that incorporates God
should be part of a science textbook is
a most grievous insult to thinking people
everywhere.
Evolution
is a theory. It has been repeatedly tested,
and has been repeatedly proven in those
tests. It is not a "law," but
there is a preponderance of evidence to
show its validity.
Intelligent
design is equivalent to saying "computers
are so complicated that they must be run
by magic." Yes, it is true that to
the average person, the more you look at
the inner workings of computers, the more
complicated they become. It is also true
that there comes a point when it's impossible
to know what's going on without a college
degree. But it doesn't make "magic"
an acceptable explanation.
It's
all very well and good to whine about how
"the world's so complicated. I just
don't get it, so God must have made it."
But that's simply an admission of ignorance.
Just because you're too thick-headed to
put down your Bible and try reading biology
texts with an open mind, doesn't give you
the right to try to put mysticism into the
realm of science.
It
will be a cold day in hell when the Christians
who espouse the intelligent design idea
can come up with an experiment to test it.
If they want to step into the world of science
and have their idea debated, they need to
play by the rules. Would you come onto a
basketball court and expect to score a touchdown?
Then don't try to talk about your "theory"
and say it should be presented in the scientific
field when it is little more than a half-baked
idea that doesn't even warrant being called
a "hypothesis."
The
rules in the scientific world are that unless
you can reproducibly test an idea, your
hypothesis isn't worth the paper it's written
on. There is even a satirical magazine for
such things called "The Journal of
Irreproducible Results." Entirely tounge-in-cheek,
it is a place for outlandish musings and
so-called experiments that go far beyond
the line of rational thought.
That
is the place for the intelligent design
folks to sell their snake oil. But to argue
that an untestable idea even begins to warrant
publication is to demand an exception to
the rules simply because you've got faith.
Take
a look at scientific textbooks. They are
filled with provable, reproducible statements.
Physics? They call it the "law of gravity"
for a reason.
Chemistry?
It's a safe bet that burning paper produces
carbon dioxide, heat and water every single
time. Biology? There's not much doubt that
photosynthesis produces food for plants
and releases oxygen.
Someone
really, really smart must have made the
world, since it's too complicated for me
to understand. Yeah, that'll fly.
"The
intelligent design hypothesis has one major
flaw: it requires one to believe that a
competent, thinking, omnipotent, divine
being created the platypus: a venomous,
egg-laying, duck-billed mammal." –
Anonymous.
|
