Monday, October 18, 2010

Intelligent Design Meets Resistance in Glasgow

They are among Scotland’s most eminent scientists, they believe the world was created in six days and women were made from Adam’s rib ...and they’re coming to a school near you.

A new creationist group that preaches the “scientific” theory of intelligent design has set up in Glasgow with the stated aim of promoting its beliefs to schools and colleges.

The Centre for Intelligent Design, headed by a Northern Irish professor of genetics, a vice-president of the Royal College of Physicians and a former school inspector, has already prepared the ground for a clash with authorities.

The group’s director, Dr Alastair Noble, told the Sunday Herald it was “inevitable” the debate would make its way into schools – even though the Scottish Government says teachers should not regard intelligent design as science.

“We are definitely not targeting schools, but that doesn’t mean to say we may not produce resources that go to schools,” Dr Noble said, adding that he had already been asked to speak in Scottish schools, and agreed to do so.

Read it all here.


Anonymous said...

It always amazes me when
"scientists" attack "those of faith" saying having a creator is a "leap of faith" as if they are not doing their own great leaps of faith in all the missing links etc.

It also seems the fact that they have a particular religious background is a mark against them - in that case why shouldn't membership in the "society of atheists" be a mark against those who do not believe in creationism or intelligent design? Everyone is coming from a particular perspective. It seems that if it's good for the goose it should be good for the gander.

How do you explain the bombadier beetle? In Darwin’s Black Box, Michael Behe, a biochemist, has shown that Darwinian evolution is impossible. Darwin believed that numerous, successive slight modifications could advance biological systems. (note the importance of the word systems - not individual species) Using a mousetrap as an example, Behe showed this is impossible – you need all of the parts of the mousetrap to catch a mouse. You can’t catch a few with a platform, add the hammer and improve the function and add a spring and catch a few more. You must have all the parts before it will function.
EX. is the bombardier beetle, which defends itself by shooting out bad-smelling gases that ignite in the face of an enemy at 212 degrees F. (as hot as boiling water). Sometimes he can do this 4-5 times in quick succession. To do this two kinds of chemicals are used, hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone. If you mix them together in a lab they explode. To carry these chemicals together, the beetle has an inhibitor to prevent the chemicals from exploding even though they are stored in the same compartment. In a separate compartment, an anti-inhibitor waits for the right moment to neutralize the inhibitor. When the beetle wants to fire at an enemy, the anti-inhibitor is squirted through a tube to unite with the other two chemicals that are squirted through their separate tube. It neutralized the inhibitor so the two chemicals are free to react violently together and explode. An evolving beetle would be blown up if he had the two chemicals without the inhibitor. How could the inhibitor evolve: there is no need for it unless you first have the two chemicals, but if you have the chemicals without the inhibitor it is too late? If the inhibitor evolved it would just sit there unused. Does this mean that for thousands of years beetles mixed the two chemicals for no good reason until an anti-inhibitor evolved? Someone needed to know that the beetle needed both an inhibitor and an anti-inhibitor if he were to survive. Gail Mellish

Alice C. Linsley said...

Thanks, Gail. That's a wonderful example to illustrate the fallacy of Darwinian evolution. And to illustrate the great complexity of the created world.

Science has much to learn and can only advance to the degree that scientists keep their minds open and are willing to entertain all the facts, even those that don't seem to fit their theories.

Anonymous said...

Dear Alice,

I have really enjoyed your site for a long time - since Rick Lobs introduced me to it on his site. What a joy to have so many things explained - didn't even know I had questions before:)

Thanks for your expertise! Gail