We all know the game of the Intelligent Design Creationist crowd. Yes, point at something that looks complex, find out that we don’t have the complete story for how it came to be, erroniously call this evidence for design, whip out some flash animations making fun of scientists, and then whine about the dogmatic repressive science establishment and the school system and the constitution and whatever else they think is keeping their empty ideas out of the schools. (Notice how at no point in this process, they actually do any scientific research.)
Some of you may know that “Irreducible Complexity” is Michael Behe’s way of saying “I don’t know. Therefore it was designed.”
Some of you may know that “Complex Specified Information” is William Dembski’s way of saying “If we don’t know how it evolved, it has CSI. If we do know how it evolved, it doesn’t have CSI. Therefore, CSI demonstrates that if we don’t know how it evolved, it was designed. And evolution cannot generate CSI, by definition. I’m so smartt.”(sic)
But have any of you heard what Toronto-based ID proponent and Dembski’s Co-blogger, Denyse O’Leary thinks intelligent design predicts? Stupid. Another topic ripe for Monday Madness. Read More…