ID-ing the H1N1

When William Dembski came to speak at OU awhile back, he claimed to have invented a set of esoteric mathematical tools with which he and other intelligent design proponents can detect complex specified information even in very complex entities such as living things. Given the current media-charged hysteria, it seems that the time is ripe for creation scientists to do some creative science, applying their novel theories to a novel threat. The new H1N1 is, after all, a relatively simple string of DNA which ought to readily succumb to ID's sophisticated algorithms, once the lab geeks take the time to sequence it. After crunching his numbers, Dembski and his crew should be able to determine whether the new H1N1 is indeed composed of complex specified information, and if so, what the detectable design of this virus tells us about the skills and intentions of its designer. Only once we understand what this hypothetical designer is really up to can we hope to make a viable vaccine, because anyone who designs and builds viruses may well work around our attempts at prophylaxis.

Discovery Institute - you now have a research program.  Go forth and do some science!

SB320

"The Legislature further finds that the teaching of some scientific subjects, such as biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning, can cause controversy, and that some teachers may be unsure of the expectations concerning how they should present information on such subjects."

I find that whenever those who make the laws which govern the schools declare that certain scientific subjects cause controversy, we will almost inevitably find that they have thereby caused a controversy surrounding those very subjects. Moreover, I find that the scientifically useful data on abiogenesis, anthropogenic global warming, and human cloning are really quite scant compared to the overwhelming evidence from disparate fields supporting the biological evolution of species over time by descent with modification.

There are interesting legal and ethical debates to be had on the matter of cloning, a fascinating series of hypotheses to be batted about regarding the formation of the most primitive complex molecules, and a wonderful debate to be had (within my peculiar field of statistical modeling and simulation) on the predictive power of climate models. These are all debates which I enjoyed greatly during and after majoring in (hard) sciences in college and (harder) maths in grad school, and I wish all high-school kids would engage in these debates vigorously and with an eye to discovering new truths.

That said, the evolution versus creation debate stands apart from those abovementioned, in that it is in no sense a scientific controversy but rather a clash of worldviews, between those who see the world solely through the eyes of faith, and those who see it with their own eyes. Ancient Hebrew/Arabic/Sanskrit cosmogonies are pitted against modern scientific theories, in the hopes that citizens will frame this particular controversy as a stark choice between religious faith and scientific knowledge. It doesn't have to be this way, but surely this is precisely how folks like Kern and Brogdon see it.

All this bluster about helping "students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories" is so much smokescreen, designed to obscure an intelligently designed wedge which starts with "scientific weaknesses" and ultimately widens out to the first verses of someone's favorite holy book. If you doubt this, just go back and look at the campaign propaganda of the legislators sponsoring and vocally supporting this bill.

Tues. Tee

I hope someday to find an agnostic IDist who is angered (or at least discomfited) by both of the implications of this shirt. Most people I know do believe in some sort of god & some sort of biological evolution, so this shirt shouldn't piss people off too often.

Friday Fishbait - Always a bigger fish

Came across this little gem this afternoon on the way to the $.99 margaritas and Tex-Mex.

Clearly, the bigger fish is consuming the smaller fish and integrating it into itself. Metaphorically, Darwin's theories are being absorbed into a larger truth. This may be the idea that the "Infinite is free to create all the processes of the finite order to accomplish the purposes of Eternity" as posited by Bruce Prescott (in a simply sublime posting which will undoubtedly annoy Christians and Infidels alike) or it may be that Darwin's ideas had to be absorbed and subsumed by other scientific ideas to form a new evolutionary synthesis. Both of these ideas are stimulating and worthy of discussion.

Alternatively, this sticker could indicate merely that the driver likes to think of himself as a bad-ass super-predator, destroying his ideological enemies with the cold-blooded efficiency and ruthlessness of a shark. Of course, such an interpretation seems a bit uncharitable, but perhaps not inapt. We've seen how these LifeChurchers (TM) drive about town, and if the leaden shoe fits...

Trippier than a tripping trip...

Try listening to Infected Mushroom's album (pictured just below)
while reading Pascal Boyer's book (pictured just above).
It is at least as freaky as syncing up Pink Floyd
albums to the History Channel.
Enjoy!