Not by chance

National Post ^ | 12/1/05 | Stephen C. Meyer

[Tribune7]

I know too many True ChristiansÒ to ever trust one with anything I hold dear.

I don't think you should trust anybody, personally, except for one person and he managed to rise from the dead.

[frgoff]

>Just because it is not know why the structure is so complex,<

Dembski addresses this in his mathematical essays. He refers to it as specified complexity. He basically demonstrates mathematically that certain complex systems can be explained by chance and others require intelligence.

His work was published quite consistently until he was branded with the label of "creationist." Now peer reviewers refuse to even consider his work for review.

Of course, like Dembski, I think peer review is highly over-rated. Fermi, Maxwell, Plank and Einstein submitted most of their papers before the peer review process was in place. No peer review, but some darn fine physics came from their work.

Peer review tends to be a method to preserve the status quo and make sure any ideas presented to the scientific community are about as interesting as Wonder bread.

Peer review is to scientific progress what the Fairness Doctrine was to talk radio, IMO.

[balrog666]

He wasn't the only one.

Yea, start the talk show!

[AndrewC]

Before anyone accuses anyone of deception with respect to Meyer. He does belong to "The Discovery Institute". Beyond that, he has the right to express his opinion.

[AndrewC]

He wasn't the only one.

You'll never guess who might have read the Bible. Nahhh, it was a wild guess.

[Tinman73]

I had to look up his credentials because I am unfamiular with Dembski .

A mathematician and a philosopher, William A. Dembski is associate research professor in the conceptual foundations of science at Baylor University and a senior fellow with Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture in Seattle. He is also the executive director of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (www.iscid.org). Dr. Dembski previously taught at Northwestern University, the University of Notre Dame, and the University of Dallas. He has done postdoctoral work in mathematics at MIT, in physics at the University of Chicago, and in computer science at Princeton University. A graduate of the University of Illinois at Chicago where he earned a B.A. in psychology, an M.S. in statistics, and a Ph.D. in philosophy, he also received a doctorate in mathematics from the University of Chicago in 1988 and a master of divinity degree from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1996. He has held National Science Foundation graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. Dr. Dembski has published articles in mathematics, philosophy, and theology journals and is the author/editor of seven books. In The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance Through Small Probabilities (Cambridge University Press, 1998), he examines the design argument in a post-Darwinian context and analyzes the connections linking chance, probability, and intelligent causation. The sequel to The Design Inference appeared with Rowman & Littlefield in 2002 and critiques Darwinian and other naturalistic accounts of evolution. It is titled No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased without Intelligence. Dr. Dembski's most recent book is a coedited collection with Michael Ruse for Cambridge University Press titled Debating Design: From Darwin to DNA.

He has impressive scientific back ground, But it looks like he is choosing a path in Theology instead of science. (a master of divinity degree from Princeton Theological Seminary in 1996.)
Again, I believe he is infusing intelligent design theory only because of his belief that complexity can not be natural. Sort of the way Niles Bohr, in an opposite way, supported Chaos Theory (too many variables).

[Elsie]

What would be the intelligent design for redundant organs in animals ?

Well, if one were to accept some ancient writings, they'd see that the CREATION has been subject to frustration. Perhaps THAT is why things today are not just quite perfect.

---

Romans 8:19-21
The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that[a] the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

[Elsie]

Sounds right to me!

[Elsie]

...anything I hold dear.

And just what might these (this) be?

[Tribune7]

South Park's cool.

[Tribune7]

:-)

[bondserv]

Heh. Consider the alternative:

"Religion convinced the world that there's an invisible man in the sky who watches everything you do. And there's 10 things he doesn't want you to do or else you'll go to a burning place with a lake of fire until the end of eternity. But he loves you!"

-George Carlin

I've always thought that the whole diety thing was a nice idea, but given the warp and woof of human history (and mankind's stunning ability to self-decieve when presented with the inexorable or the terrifying) I just could never bring myself to believe it.

Consider for a moment the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Creator of the universe chose to become a man like His creation. Rather than remain nebulously untouchable, beyond our vision; He injected Himself into our time domain to clarify everyones minds regarding reality.

Jhn 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

A person cannot know what is truth, nor know the Creator, until they have recognized Jesus Christ's perfection. No other man has been or will be perfect. In His perfect Deity rests our Salvation, for His sacrifice was the ransom that brings about the pardon we need for fellowship with His Holiness.

Who wants to enter an eternity that houses evil? Therein lies our need for the washing that the blood of the cross accomplished.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Fester Chugabrew]

All phenomena can be explained as occuring naturally. All phenomena can be explained as occuring supernaturally. The distinction between the two, while arbitrary, is not a distinction from which science can completely extricate itself.

[A. Pole]

You take the broad path and enter the wide gate, you end up in place without God for eternity, which is what I guess you want. Anyway eternity doesn't have an end.

The Time has beginning and the end. That is why it is said:

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth".

Eternity is "before", "after" and above the Time, above the every age or eon. Eternity it is not the endless time.

[DurtySanches]

That leads me to believe your parents were atheists too?

[Tribune7]

Exactly!