Archive for the 'Creationism' Category

The “Smartest Guy” in Intelligent Design calls it quits

Mike Gene is known to some as “The Smartest Guy In Intelligent Design”: This may seem like an oxymoron but is actually quite plausible since he is one of the few high-profile ID advocates who had the good-sense to avoid associating with the Discovery Institute and their gaggle of nit-witted followers. The DI, creators of the “Wedge” document, are the people responsible (in part) for loosing the Dover trial, and drafting the new Florida legislation that promises to usher in a whole slew of Doveresque legal theater.

Mike Gene keeps a lower profile than many of the “big names” in ID - unlike Michael Behe and William Dembski he has never been a tenured researcher at a famous institution. He’s never even published a single paper. Even the name “Mike Gene” may be a pseudonym. According to an interview he gave to a fundamentalist-Christian podcast called “Darwin or Design” he stated that this obfuscated identity is intentional and serves to shield his important professional research work from the unwelcome hostility of all those anti-ID folk, however it could just as easily be a ruse to conceal the fact that Gene is unqualified for the role he has assumed.

Mike’s main contribution to the ID kerfuffle is the theory of “front loading” - finding out just what this theory is requires you to buy his book: “The Design Matrix”. In what might appear to be an an excessively bonkers act of self-defeating candor Gene admits that his theory is not science, should not be taught in schools and does not meet any known standards of experimental rigor required for it to become science in the forseeable future. Despite this, Mike seems to have kept a substantial gang of enthusiastic followers who are all keen to big-up his project.

To save you the bother of finding out: “Front Loading” appears to be the notion that things did indeed evolve just like that nasty atheist Richard Dawkins claims, except that God (or some other unspecified first cause) knew it would be that way. An argument for Front Loading often goes something like this: Look kids, a protein which is critical for brain formation is used by a yeast-cell. But since yeast has no brain these proteins must have been put there in anticipation of large-brained creatures such as ourselves.

That’s more or less where the argument ends, except of course for the titular “Design Matrix” - the (unproven) idea that one can detect design by counting up and tabulating the number of features present in an artifact which resemble designed objects and from this infer a probability of design.  I’ve heard this approach summed up as somewhere between plain-nonsense and naive wishful thinking, but even this is light-years ahead of the crypto-creationist junk which passes for reasoning amongst the ID community.

I’ve been reading what I always assumed was his blog - “Telic Thoughts”, a site which I had been lurking and occasionally commenting (until my account got suspended). These days I just lurk - I find that fifteen minutes creationism can get my blood pumping faster than the strongest double espresso. But shock of all shocks, Mike Gene has just announced that he’s going to resign from his own blog - and I guess he’s handed the passwords over to his chums Denyse Oleary and Bradford.

Mike’s stated reason for giving up the blog is that all-time favourite of politicians: The need to spend more time with his family. At the risk of being snarky, I’d suspect that the smartest guy in ID may just have been smart enough to figure out that ID is really going nowhere, and the only thing a smart guy can do is quit.

Creationism, bad for your reputation

The latest pro-creationist campaign run by the Discovery Institute seeks to establish credibility for the Intelligent Design movement by publishing a list of “reputable scientists” who are willing to endorse ID as an alternative to the theory of Evolution. None of the names listed have any particular relevance to evolutionary development or have published any peer-reviewed papers explaining the expert reasons for their dissent.

According to Time magazine, none of the 600 odd names listed by the discovery institute are Evolutionary biologists, however a number of the DI’s names are people who really should know better than to get involved with this debate. For example one is an Emeritus professor of Geology who believes in young earth creationism, and a neurosurgeon who denies common-descent of life.

If you are a scientist who works for a reputable institution and you allow yourself to endorse this medievalist nonsense, people are going to ask questions. Mostly, fellow scientists and the media are going to ask you to justify your belief, and if you respond by parroting the fragile rhetoric of the Discovery Institute you will be branded as a credulous nit-wit. This is not a conspiracy, this is the way that science detects frauds and nincompoops.

And this is exactly what has happened to Dr. Michael Egnor, a consultant and professor of neuro-surgey and pediatrics. He was called to account for his odd beliefs in a short article published in Time Magazine. The good doctor responded, but in the opinion of most observers he merely demonstrated that he is spectacularly ignorant of high-school level science topics.

The wing-nuts at Overwhelming Evidence are already accusing the rest of the world of being involved in a conspiracy theory to scare scientists like Michael Egnor back into line. This fits in very well with their martyrdom complex, and a desire to be seen as the lone voice of sanity in a world that overwhelmingly rejects their theories. They would very much like to make a martyr of Egnor so that they can show the world just how hard done-by they are. They would like us to think that a nameless legion of enemies lead by Richard Dawkins has a grudge against Dr. Egnor, however the truth is much simpler.

It is not Dawkins or a conspiracy of “scientists” who have hurt Egnor’s reputation. It is Egnor’s own folly that he allows the Discovery Institute to sell him as an expert in evolutionary development when in actual fact he is an expert in brain physiology. This naturally creates an impression of a man who does not know his own limits.

According to the almighty Internet Dr Michael Egnor is a trusted surgeon, but would you trust a man to perform brain surgery on your child if you knew that he could not tell the difference between science and the kind of pseudo-scientific mysticism pedaled by the Discovery Institute.

More overwhelming madness

I just cannot let this go: I’ve become an obsessive freak spotter, currently I am obsessed by the ongoing madness at OverwhelmingEvidence.com, the cool site for teen scientists to discuss the exciting and important theory of Intelligent Design. The growing consensus is that this site is populated by approximately 50% trolls, 25% ID opponents leaving a measly 25% remaining for the earnest ID supporters for whom the site was allegedly created.

Today’s was a very exciting day for OE afficianardos. A user was banned from the forums for being a “troll”, his crime was drawing readers’ attention to a very well researched study about the way that ID proponents have been mis-representing the Haeckel’s Embryo Drawing controversy. The study demonstrated that not only is it today’s EvoDevo consensus that Haeckel’s observations were false, but this has been documented explicitly in the every text book that mentioned his infamous drawings, and this has been the case since at the latest 1939.

Naturally this post had to be deleted, and the author’s comments removed from public view. Unfortunately the blogging software that OE use has the nasty habit of deleting entire threads if the editor attempts to delete just one comment. “Patrick”, one of the OE moderators diligently re-posted the deleted comments under his own user-id, including the very latest one by a newly registered user upon which they posted an explanation of what they had just done (please see the screenshot).

I’m certain that some of our British readers my recognise the name BobMort. Just click through to his profile if you want to have a guess at who he might be (or pretends to be):

oe_repost.png

And I should also point out that a few hours before BobMort registered I spotted another new user called “ViCreeves“. I do hope that they start posting together, they were a great double-act.

More Madness from Overwhelming Evidence

I’m not the only blogger to have noticed how uber-zany Overwhelming Evidence has become; If you were to take something that is insane, and then add additional nuttiness, plus a dash of loopyness, and then view the whole thing through the distorted lens of a fractured mind - only then will you get an inkling of how barking mad that site is.

Alison, Pooflinger and The DesignInterference all seem to take issue with OE.com’s “quizzlestick”. She wrote an article that is utter nonsense, even by the low standards of OE.com. I am pretty sure that rebuttals like this are not needed, the whole site seems to have been taken over by pranksters. The best thing we can do is laugh along with them.