Robert Lee Hotz covers science, medicine and technology for the Los Angeles Times. He received his B.A. in English and M.A. in theater history from Tufts University.
Posted on 07/30/2006 12:56:40 PM PDT by infoguy
Under the corrupt cloak of a "book review," this Sunday's Los Angeles Times (July 30, 2006) continues its underhanded and one-sided assault on the theory of intelligent design (ID). "The language of life," by Robert Lee Hotz*, is a review of three new works that attack intelligent design. The review was promoted on the top of the front page of the "Sunday preview" edition under the heading, "Less than 'intelligent design': Darwin's believers debunk the theory." And rather than providing its readers an honest critique, the Times' "review" is nothing less than a full-on Darwin propaganda piece. Hotz begins his article as follows (emphasis/link mine),
In the border war between science and faith, the doctrine of "intelligent design" is a sly subterfuge - a marzipan confection of an idea presented in the shape of something more substantial.
As many now understand - and as a federal court ruled in December - intelligent design is the bait on the barbed hook of creationist belief ...
Objectivity? Forget it. You won't find it with Hotz. Hotz' hit piece on ID then continues by haphazardly labeling ID as a "ruse," a "ploy," a "disingenuous masquerade," and "dishonesty."
Hotz claims the works he's reviewing are written by "some of the nation's most distinguished thinkers." Well, one of the reviewed books is by well-known "skeptic" Michael Shermer, whose work has been cited numerous times for falsehoods and inaccuracy (for example, here, here, here, and here)). Shermer has also floundered considerably while defending Darwinism in public, as witnessed in a 2004 debate with Stephen Meyer on TV's Faith Under Fire (link with video). In 2005, Shermer struggled in a debate with William Dembski (link/audio). "Distinguished"? Sorry, Mr. Hotz.
As NewsBusters has already reported this year (link), the Los Angeles Times has never published a single article from a leading spokesperson of intelligent design theory.** (Leading spokespeople would include names such as Stephen Meyer, William Dembski, Michael Behe, Jonathan Wells, Guillermo Gonzalez, Jay Wesley Richards, and acclaimed writer Lee Strobel.) Yet the Times has now published its tenth piece in the last 14 months attacking ID! (I'm using this count).
Is there balance at the Los Angeles Times on this issue? Not even close, folks. The Times is unequivocally disserving its readers. How many Times readers are aware that one of the world's most renowned atheists, Antony Flew, has recently become open to God largely due to the persuasive science of intelligent design?
* Hotz "covers science, medicine, and technology" for the Times, yet Hotz has a B.A. in English and an M.A. in theater history. Am I the only one to think it odd that the Times would find him well qualified to write on science, medicine, and technology?
** Stephen Meyer did co-author a 1987 op-ed in the LA Times (almost 19 years ago) on the subject of human rights; but the article does not delve into the topic of intelligent design. In addition, there was a book review in the Times over 8 years ago (1998) by Edward McGlynn Gaffney, Jr. His review, about a book on the 1925 Scopes trial, included brief references to intelligent design science. However, Gaffney's name would not be included among well-known proponents of ID.
I told you, I believe in intelligence.
Why can't you accept that?
I just don't think it something that can be scientifically measured.
I'm not the one "wrapped in science," you are.
You are the one who wants to force real eternal concepts into a tiny thing like science. You are the one who wants science to be bigger than it is.
Your point is you think if it's real, it must be science.
You are wrong.
Any of the diseases that cause the body to attack itself.
Any of the conditions that cause the body to develop cancer.
Any of the conditions the lessen the ability of the blood to carry oxygen.
Any of the conditions that cause the brain to degrade or behave in an abnormal way.
Why is our hearing and vision so poor?
Why does our blood bond with CO?
Why are some of the waste products we produce dangerous to ourself?
Why does natural childbirth have such a high death rate?
Please provide a reference to where I said anything pro/con about the existence of a Designer.
You blaspheme my Creator.
So don't talk about "low estimation" to anyone else.
This is merely your account, and you are weak in posting real evidence.
The "Darwinists" are actually doing very well. The Discovery Institute has been in 'recovery mode' after their defeat in Dover, PA, and getting even several of their key supporters angry. The ID movement has been forced into their fall-back position of "teach the controversy' because they cannot prevail on the basis of evidence.
Just like the "theory of astrology" and "the theory of alchemy."
Pretty funny stuff.
Thanks for the laugh.
William Dempski, ID proponent, Fellow at Discovery Institute "My thesis is that all disciplines find their completion in Christ and cannot be properly understood apart from Christ." - Intelligent Design, p206.
"Christ is indispensable to any scientific theory, even if its practitioners do not have a clue about him." - Intelligent Design, p. 210
"But there are deeper motivations...... When you are attributing the wonders of nature to these mindless material mechanisms, God's glory is getting robbed...And so there is a cultural war here. Ultimately I want to see God get the credit for what he's done - and he's not getting it." - address given at Fellowship Baptist Church, Waco, Texas, March 7, 2004
"Certainly as Christians we believe there is an angelic hierarchy - it's not just that there's this physical material world and there's God. There can be various hierarchies of intelligent beings operating, God can work through what can be called derived intelligences - processes which carry out the Divine will, but maybe not perfectly because of the fall." - (Ibid.)
"Accordingly, intelligent design should be understood as the evidence that God has placed in nature to show that the physical world is the product of intelligence and not simply the result of mindless material forces. This evidence is available to all apart from the special revelation of God in salvation history as recounted in Scripture." - Why President Bush Got It Right about Intelligent Design, 2005
Phillip Johnson, DI Fellow and founder, presumed author of the infamous Wedge Document: "This isn't really, and never has been, a debate about science, it's about religion and philosophy." - World Magazine, November 30, 1996
Admitting that the entire purpose of the Wedge strategy is religious: "If we understand our own times, we will know that we should affirm the reality of God by challenging the domination of materialism and naturalism in the world of the mind. With the assistance of many friends I have developed a strategy for doing this....We call our strategy the "wedge." - Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, 1997, pp. 91-92
"The Intelligent Design movement starts with the recognition that "In the beginning was the Word," and "In the beginning God created." Establishing that point isn't enough, but it is absolutely essential to the rest of the gospel message." - Forward to Creation, Evolution, & Modern Science, 2000
"We are removing the most important cultural roadblock to accepting the role of God as creator." - LA Times, March 25, 2001
"This is a way of phrasing the issue that ought to bring together Protestants of different views young-earth believers and the scriptures, old-earthers who interpret Genesis differently,.... In the beginning was the word. In the beginning God created. True or false." Kansas conference, June, 2001
"Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools." - American Family Radio, January 10, 2003
"The subject is not just the theory of evolution, the subject is the reality of God." - Hank Hanegraaf's "Bible Answer Man" radio program, 12/19/2004
"This is a way of phrasing the issue that ought to bring together Protestants of different views young-earth believers and the scriptures, old-earthers who interpret Genesis differently,.... In the beginning was the word. In the beginning God created. True or false." Kansas conference, June, 2001
Casey Luskin, ID Proponent, writes for DI:
"Obviously, the question comes up, 'Who is the designer?' Well, the leadership [of the Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) clubs] will promote the viewpoint that the God of the Bible is the designer." - Evolution critics meet to create strategy, The Plain Dealer, 07/29/02
Stephen C. Meyer, Director and Senior Fellow of the DI: "I think the intelligent designer is God." - Nightline, 8/10/05
Nancy Pearcey: "If the broader impact of Darwinism was to remove Christianity from the sphere of objective truth, then the broader significance of the Intelligent Design movement will be to bring it back. By providing evidence of God's work in nature, it restores Christianity to the status of a genuine knowledge claim,... - Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, 2004
Discovery Institute: The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which western civilization was built. - The Wedge Strategy, Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture
"Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies. Bringing together leading scholars from the natural sciences and those from the humanities and social sciences, the Center explores how new developments in biology, physics and cognitive science raise serious doubts about scientific materialism and have re-opened the case for a broadly theistic understanding of nature. [Note: The original version of the Wedge document phrased this last part as "have reopened the case for the supernatural."]" - Ibid
"Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialistic's worldview and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions." - Ibid
Michael Behe, ID author, an expert witness at the Dover, PA trial: "To a person who does not feel obliged to restrict his search to unintelligent causes, the straightforward conclusion is that many biochemical systems were designed. They were designed not by the laws of nature, not by chance and necessity; rather, they were planned..." - Darwin's Black Box, 1998
"By "intelligent design" I mean to imply design beyond the laws of nature. That is, taking the laws of nature as given, are their other reasons for concluding that life and its component systems have been intentionally arranged? In my book, and in this essay, whenever I refer to intelligent design (ID) I mean this stronger sense of design-beyond-laws." - Philosophical Objections to Intelligent Design, 2002
"I think that we are all descended from some single cell in the distant past but that that cell and later parts of life were intentionally produced as the result of intelligent activity. As a Christian, I say that intelligence is very likely to be God." - Can You Believe in God and Evolution?, Time, 2005
One who wouldn't similarly impugn you. Take or leave it.
I appreciate your not impugning me for thread-spamming.
Because that would be illogical, as I DON'T.
And, to infoguy, no IDist has yet written a refutation. No IDist seems able to answer the questions raised in this essay.
If IDists do not accept anti-gravity for "teach the controversy", how can they be intellectually honest in dealing with evolution?
Why does anyone think that any feature writer for the New York Times is going to provide the readers with anything resembling scientific wisdom. The purpose of this article is to provoke controversy. Objective and intelligent information about the topics of evolution and creationism is to be found elsewhere.
Freedom of religion means freedom to believe any dumb idea that comes along. Odd beliefs are quite common--psychics, alien abductions, appearances of Mary on cheese sandwiches, feng shui, faith healings, demons, etc., etc.
Children often have beliefs about monsters hiding under the bed.
We say to children, let's look. We say to adults, let's examine the evidence. Is it likely, given all that we know, about microbes and medicine that the flu is caused by God or satanic possession?
Every ID proponent trusts X-rays when they go to the doctor. This is because ID proponents secretly admit that they trust naturalistic explanations. When evolution is mentioned, they become hypocrites.
Thanks for the ping!
"Do intelligent design people believe that cows could have evolved from buffalo? Or that Lions could have evolved from Tigers?"
Easy - No. And No. Because a cow is a cow. A buffalo is a buffalo. A lion is a lion. And a tiger is a tiger. And all were created by God. Whether I understand it or not or even believe it or not is beside the point.
They think that the oridinary human is just an intelligent ape. They, on the other hand, are gods.
Thanks.
Interesting.
Robert Lee Hotz covers science, medicine and technology for the Los Angeles Times. He received his B.A. in English and M.A. in theater history from Tufts University.
Typisch. As academically qualified as Ward Churchill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.