Evolution Boffo Boo; ID Floppo Poo!
With apologies to Mad Magazine for the above, it's been another year...another anniversary...and therefore, another reminder to everyone about intelligent design's one and only testable hypothesis, care of William Dembski.
The links to Dembski's "prediction" about the death of evolution (and to his corollary, the "death of molecular evolution" by 2011) keep disappearing - in fact, all references to his rather rash prediction are beginning to resemble the extinct branches in an evolutionary tree:
By Dylan T. Lovan
LOUISVILLE - To William Dembski, all the debate in this country over evolution won't matter in a decade.
By then, he says, the theory of evolution put forth by Charles Darwin 150 years ago will be dead.
The mathematician turned Darwin critic says there is much to be learned about how life evolved on this planet. And he thinks the model of evolution accepted by the scientific community won't be able to supply the answers.
"I see this all disintegrating very quickly," he said."
Well, something sure has been disintegrating quickly, especially since Kitzmiller, but it has not been evolution. However, never fear, that has not been all our boy in banana was up to:
Prediction: Within the next two years work on certain enzymes will demonstrate overwhelmingly that they are extremely isolated functionally, making it effectively impossible for Darwinian and other gradualistic pathways to evolve into or out of them. This will provide convincing evidence for specified complexity as a principled way to detect design and not merely as a cloak for ignorance.
Well, that was back in 2008 when this was supposed to have been confirmed. No dice.
Even more hilarious is this one:
I predict that in the next five years [by 2003] intelligent design will be sufficiently developed to deserve funding from the National Science Foundation (Dembski, Mere Creation, 1998, p. 29).
It's enough to make one want to drink a whole bottle of single-malt scotch. Oh, wait -!
I'll wager a bottle of single-malt scotch, should it ever go to trial whether ID may legitimately be taught in public school science curricula, that ID will pass all constitutional hurdles.
Of course, he said that he would wager, not that he did. Get it? *Sparkle*
The links to Dembski's "prediction" about the death of evolution (and to his corollary, the "death of molecular evolution" by 2011) keep disappearing - in fact, all references to his rather rash prediction are beginning to resemble the extinct branches in an evolutionary tree:
Evolution theory on last legs, says seminary teacher
By Dylan T. Lovan
ASSOCIATED PRESS
LOUISVILLE - To William Dembski, all the debate in this country over evolution won't matter in a decade.By then, he says, the theory of evolution put forth by Charles Darwin 150 years ago will be dead.
The mathematician turned Darwin critic says there is much to be learned about how life evolved on this planet. And he thinks the model of evolution accepted by the scientific community won't be able to supply the answers.
"I see this all disintegrating very quickly," he said."
Well, something sure has been disintegrating quickly, especially since Kitzmiller, but it has not been evolution. However, never fear, that has not been all our boy in banana was up to:
Prediction: Within the next two years work on certain enzymes will demonstrate overwhelmingly that they are extremely isolated functionally, making it effectively impossible for Darwinian and other gradualistic pathways to evolve into or out of them. This will provide convincing evidence for specified complexity as a principled way to detect design and not merely as a cloak for ignorance.
Well, that was back in 2008 when this was supposed to have been confirmed. No dice.
Even more hilarious is this one:
I predict that in the next five years [by 2003] intelligent design will be sufficiently developed to deserve funding from the National Science Foundation (Dembski, Mere Creation, 1998, p. 29).
It's enough to make one want to drink a whole bottle of single-malt scotch. Oh, wait -!
I'll wager a bottle of single-malt scotch, should it ever go to trial whether ID may legitimately be taught in public school science curricula, that ID will pass all constitutional hurdles.
Of course, he said that he would wager, not that he did. Get it? *Sparkle*
Labels: creation/ID vs. evolution assorted random nonsense, happy anniversadvisary, William Dembski
posted by Kristine | Friday, April 02, 2010
11 Comments:
It's a very old claim.
The Imminent Demise of Evolution: The Longest Running Falsehood in Creationism
Yes, I love that link. "Death of evolution" predictions remind me of the Soviet's Five Year Plan.
Tried to throw a trackback from Panda's Thumb but got an error message. So this comment will have to serve. :)
It is much too early to judge the accuracy of the prediction -- it was a ten-year prediction and was made only four years ago.
And I wonder when you Darwinists are going to stop crowing about the Kitzmiller decision -- it was a decision by a single crackpot activist judge who said that it was based on his notion that the Founders based the Constitution's establishment clause upon a belief that organized religions are not "true" religions.
Larry, I wonder when you will realize how many "Darwinists" are very concerned about you and what you seem to be doing to your life.
Considering that we are now in the minus years for Dembski's other predictions, is it really "too early" to weigh in on this claim, as well? At any rate, this is a countdown.
Judge Jones said no such thing about religion. He ruled that intelligent design was a Trojan Horse for religion being forced into the schools by a deceptive group of crackpots that included a perjurer who, as it turned out, used money gathered at church to buy copies of Of Pandas and People for the school's library. The testimony in the case (and Dembski's no-show) as well as Jones' ruling is a matter of public record and available for anyone to read.
But if you want a prediction from me, "we" (whoever that is) will stop crowing about Kitzmiller after the next variant of creationism is attempted to be slipped into the public schools, prompting the next ruling against said variant. There you have it. We'll be crowing over that success instead.
Poor Larry wonders when us ebul Darwinists will stop crowing about Kitzmiller v. Dover. You might ask the same of Casey Luskin, who seems to have a similar obsession
Kristine said,
>>>>>> Larry, I wonder when you will realize how many "Darwinists" are very concerned about you and what you seem to be doing to your life. <<<<<<
And exactly what is it that I "seem" to be doing with my life?
>>>>> ( it was a decision by a single crackpot activist judge who said that it was based on his notion that the Founders based the Constitution's establishment clause upon a belief that organized religions are not "true" religions)
Judge Jones said no such thing about religion. <<<<<<
Wrong -- in a Dickinson College commencemenrt speech that has now been deleted from the Internet, Jones said,
. . . this much is very clear. The Founders believed that true religion was not something handed down by a church or contained in a Bible, but was to be found through free, rational inquiry. At bottom then, this core set of beliefs led the Founders, who constantly engaged and questioned things, to secure their idea of religious freedom by barring any alliance between church and state.
>>>>>> But if you want a prediction from me, "we" (whoever that is) will stop crowing about Kitzmiller after the next variant of creationism is attempted to be slipped into the public schools, prompting the next ruling against said variant. There you have it. We'll be crowing over that success instead. <<<<<<<
You Darwinists are not sitting as pretty in the courts as you think you are. The Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) is old and is based on the "Lemon test," which is now widely discredited. The Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish decision came within a single vote of getting an en banc (full court) appeals court rehearing and within a single vote of being granted certorari by the Supreme Court, and the judges/justices who dissented from the denials of certiorari and en banc rehearing wrote long dissenting opinions (especially unusual at the Supreme Court level, where denials of certiorari are usually made without comment). Selman v. Cobb County was vacated by the appeals court because of missing evidence and the school board then took a dive by settling the case out of court. There is just the Kitzmiller v. Dover decision by a crackpot activist judge who said that the decision was based on his cockamamie notion that the Founders based the establishment clause upon a belief that organized religions are not "true" religions. Kitzmiller has not been challenged by other court cases because legislatures and school boards have found ways to "lawsuit-proof" the teaching of criticisms of evolution in the public schools.
carlsonjok said...
>>>>>> Poor Larry wonders when us ebul Darwinists will stop crowing about Kitzmiller v. Dover. You might ask the same of Casey Luskin, who seems to have a similar obsession <<<<<<
Continuing to crow about the decision is the obsession.
When your "last legs" are as thick as stone pillars, that's a much firmer stance when compared to something that has no leg to stand on.
Larry, I agree with you, Atheists should stop crowing about the spot-on decision of Judge Jones.
Why talk about old news like the Kitzmiller case when we can talk about the most recent rash of Catholic child rape? Or the murders in northern Ireland? Or even the great work the parties of god are doing to help people die in Africa?
There's so much more to talk about!
Here are my predictions.
1. Evolutionists will stop citing the Kitzmiller case 1 day after atheists stop citing the Treaty of Tripoli.
2. William Dembski will go to his grave without ever being remembered for doing the kind of damage that Brigham Young or L. Ron Hubbard have done.
3. Before the cock crows on Jan 1, 2017, Dembski will deny he said this at least three times by claiming it was taken out of context.
Evolution never dies! It is in our heart and soul.
Post a Comment
<< Home