The Mechanism of Intelligent Design, Part 2

You won’t believe this, but no sooner did we post The Mechanism of Intelligent Design, but we discovered yet another article on the same topic. This must be more than mere coincidence.

The new one isn’t from the Discoveroids. Oh no, this one has an even better provenance. We found it because of the blaring sirens and lights flashing on the wall display of our Retard-o-tron™. The blinking letters on the wall said WorldNetDaily.

We were directed to an article titled Mechanism behind intelligent design uncovered? At first we thought they were writing about the Discoveroid article, but no — it’s something completely new and original. But before we begin we must warn you: This one is in way out there in Time Cube territory. Really. It’s extremely bizarre, even for WND.

The author is Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D. She’s described as a scientist, patent attorney and adjunct law professor of bioethics. Also, she’s a senior strategist for something called the Center for Reclaiming America, and a conference speaker and founder of Science Ministries Inc. We haven’t Googled for either of those, but we can pretty well guess what they’re all about. Okay, here are some excerpts from her article, with bold font added by us:

Few e-mails have ever stopped me as cold as the one I am about to describe. In it, the author, a former university professor who wishes to remain anonymous, claims to know the actual mechanism behind intelligent design. That is the mechanism by which God created the universe, our world and all biological life within it.

Okay, so right up front we know that Kelly is going to tell us about an anonymous email she received, one that really impressed her. She continues:

This is especially intriguing as Darwin’s theory of evolution is now hotly contested by arguments of intelligent design. One weakness of ID is its failure to offer a mechanism to counter evolution’s bogus explanation of diversity through macro-mutation. As a result, ID has failed in broad view to distinguish itself as a true scientific theory on the origin of life.

Yes, we know all about the weaknesses of intelligent design, including its failure to offer a mechanism. Let’s read on:

Now, I admit the original e-mail has all the makings of a possible hoax. On the other hand, it could possibly produce one of the most fantastic breakthroughs in scientific theory since Darwin. So which is? I’ll let you decide.

Kelly obviously doesn’t think it’s a hoax or she wouldn’t present it to us. Okay, here it comes — the anonymously-authored theory:

This theory comes from a critical analysis of the Big Bang theory, Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity and quantum physics.

Wow! Whoever the anonymous theorist is, he certainly knows a lot of science. We continue:

In the Bible, we are told that God created the universe out of nothing by using light. This is confirmed by modern cosmologists.

Huh? Oh well, in for a penny, in for a pound. Let’s keep reading:

They acknowledge physical existence had a beginning from complete nothingness (no time, no space and no matter). Then from a single focal point of light the physical world came into existence initially in the form of sub-atomic particles, i.e., the Big Bang theory. Of primary importance were the protons, neutrons and electrons, the basic building blocks of all matter that now exists in the physical universe.

It all came from a single point of light. Light! Light! Just as Genesis says! Wowie! (The singularity was a really bright black hole!) Here’s more:

After this explosive event, these sub-atomic particles were sometime later transformed into atomic nuclei and the various elements. When asked why the sub-atomic particles joined together into the more complex arrangements of nuclei and elements, science answers that it is due to the “electromagnetic force.” This EMF is carried out through an exchange of photons, which are light energy. For example, a photon is emitted by an atom during a transition from one energy state to another.

There again, dear reader, you see that everything is caused by light. Light! Light! Moving along:

Both the Big Bang event and subsequent arrangement of sub-atomic particles, therefore, provide our first opportunity to see light as the interface between the non-physical (spiritual) world and physical existence. Think about it. From light came matter. Then that matter was organized into various elements by EMF.

Aaaargh!! The mind boggles! This is really profound! Here’s another excerpt:

This is supported by Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity concerning the characteristics of light. Specifically, photons of light can behave dually like a stream of high-speed, submicroscopic particles, but also like a wave phenomenon. A wave is defined as a disturbance that propagates and carries energy. As a wave, light does not show the physical property of mass. This non-material characteristic, once again, reveals light as an interface between the non-physical (spiritual) world and the physical universe.

You’re learning things here you never dreamed of knowing, dear reader. Isn’t this exciting? But what about biology? Relax, it’s coming:

Science can confirm at the sub-atomic, atomic and molecular levels that changes are often due to information passed by an exchange of light energy. Unfortunately, as we reach the next level of complexity, which is the progression from the molecular stage to biological life, the processes exceed our current ability to appropriately dissect. But through logic, extrapolation and preliminary scientific findings, we may fairly hypothesize that the same method of applying EMF/light is used as in the earlier stages of progressive development.

What? Here’s more:

For example, the changes from one life form to another may require only slight alterations and/or additions to the overall structure of the DNA molecule. These small structural changes would not occur by mutation as the theory of evolution suggests, but rather by EMF causing and creating ever-increasing complex relationships between the nucleotides along the DNA strand. The combined effects of these small structural changes to the DNA molecule would be sufficient to create progressively complex physical life.

Aha! We get it! What we call mutations are caused by the electromagnetic force, which is based on light. Light! Light! On with the article:

This hypothesis on the origin of life provides a scientifically testable alternative to the mechanism of macro-mutation offered by evolution. My reason for sharing this theory is that I find it intriguing, but I do not have the expertise in physics to test it adequately. I do know as a molecular biologist that Darwin’s theory is unworkable. So my hope is this presentation will intrigue others who are qualified to determine whether this theory has sufficient merit to develop it further, dismiss it entirely or rework into something more plausible.

Now we come to the end, and we assume this is from Kelly, not the anonymous email:

In closing, it is of interest to recall that according to the Bible, God created the world and all that is in it through Christ Jesus who identifies himself as the Light of the World.

She also gives a link to a website where the full email, in all its glory, may be read and studied. Okay, we’ve done all we can, dear reader. We’ve pointed you in the right direction. Light is the mechanism of intelligent design. The rest is up to you.

Copyright © 2012. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

19 responses to “The Mechanism of Intelligent Design, Part 2

  1. NeonNoodle

    God created the universe out of nothing by using light. This is confirmed by modern cosmologists…

    I think she meant modern cosmetologists. God’s a stylin’ dude.

    …a former university professor who wishes to remain anonymous, claims to know the actual mechanism behind intelligent design.

    Okay, now I swear I didn’t peek ahead, but I’ll bet it involves a magic “water canopy” or “firmament” that once surrounded the planet, like Saturn’s rings.

    Unfortunately, as we reach the next level of complexity, which is the progression from the molecular stage to biological life, the processes exceed our current ability to appropriately dissect. But through logic, extrapolation and preliminary scientific findings, we may fairly hypothesize that the same method of applying EMF/light is used as in the earlier stages of progressive development.

    Okay, okay, I’ve got it now. The mechanism, I mean. I saw it in a Little Rascals movie once. It’s rather complicated, but it involves an eternal, all-seeing dog with a ring around its eye, a cosmic treadmill-thingy, and either an alley cat or a sausage on a string. There may also be some chewing gum and a hairpin, I don’t know. I haven’t quite worked out all the bugs yet. Gimme some time…

  2. hmmm… some fairly recent research points to polarized UV radiation as a possible cause of the symmetry issue with biological life. Of course, it happened with compounds that wouldn’t really be considered life. But OK.

    I don’t think it means what they think it means (to borrow from the Spaniard).

  3. aturingtest

    WND: “Mechanism behind intelligent design uncovered?”
    E-mail author: “Unfortunately, as we reach the next level of complexity, which is the progression from the molecular stage to biological life, the processes exceed our current ability to appropriately dissect.”
    In what world other than WND would that not just be, “Nope, sorry, I don’t really have a clue either”?
    But the rubes who swear by WND (instead of at it, like normal people) will be all impressed by that sciency sound.

  4. @SC, Curmie, or whatever “handle” you prefer (please let me know)

    Did you notice that this article was originally published in 2005? It appears that WND pulls from its archives to augment breaking DI news (or vice versa, ha ha).

    The rub is: “As a wave, light does not show the physical property of mass. This non-material characteristic, once again, reveals light as an interface between the non-physical (spiritual) world and the physical universe.”

    As usual, and necessarily for creationists to try to connect science with the supernatural, she’s had to twist words and manipulate contexts (lie) to make a point; here she implies “non-material” is not of the material or natural world.

    Take home message: “ID has failed in broad view… ” as opposed to a myopic view..

  5. Donna says: “Did you notice that this article was originally published in 2005?”

    No. In all the intellectual excitement, I missed that. As for SC or Curmie, it doesn’t matter.

  6. @Curmie
    I’ve adopted what most of the others seem to prefer.

    “In all the intellectual excitement..” Yes, I’ve noticed that you’ve been very busy this past week or so – two, even three, essays a day!

  7. docbill1351

    I think it was Penn Jillette who pointed out that the first sign of a scam is that it only operates in the dark, anonymously, inside a sealed box, at night, is invisible or otherwise undetectable.

    There was a company some years ago that took the French oil company, Total, for a ride, literally, with a remote sensing “black box” that could detect petroleum sources from the air. Of course, the test flight found something, no surprise there, but Total could never get the box to operate properly after that. Although told that it would “void the warranty” to open the box they eventually did and found a jumble of common electronics, lights and random signal generators. Sacre bleu!

    To this day there is a company that sells dousing rods claiming to detect water and, now, explosives. Total scam.

  8. Dave de Vries

    “In the Bible, we are told that God created the universe out of nothing by using light. ”

    Actually, what Genisis says is that:

    1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.

    How is that saying that “God created the universe out of nothing by using light.”?

  9. retiredsciguy

    So, the essence of intelligent design is light, eh? (Actual wording of Genesis not withstanding.)

    Well, then. It seems that cartoonists were way ahead of the curve on this one, portraying ideas as light bulbs turning on over their characters’ heads.

    Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D. avers, “…God created the universe, our world and all biological life within it.” But, apparently, not the non-biological life.

    You’re right, Curmy. Time cube-worthy. Even if it were so, it doesn’t explain the mechanism by which light poofs things into existence, So the whole idea is still at square one. No light bulb going off over Kelly’s head.

  10. Steven J. Thompson

    I was wondering, looking at the date on that article, whatever had become of Kelly Hollowell. She seems to have been active in creationism in 2005, and then, going strictly by creationist writings, to have dropped off the edge of the Earth. According to a website last updated this year, though, she’s a partner (and patent law expert) at the law firm of Waller, Lansden, Dortch & Davis in Nashville, and her list of present and prior affiliations is remarkably free of obvious creationist organizations. I think the poor woman was just going through a phase.

  11. According to her bio she’s now a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science so she’s either had a complete change of heart or she’s sleeping with the enemy.

  12. I am not a physicist, but I’m pretty sure that what makes subatomic particles come together is Strong or Weak Nuclear Binding Force–which is defintely not an electromagnetic field. And I suspect that gravity would play a role in this organization on a larger level.

    Since the curiously anonymous author of the theory has scrapped all forces except EM, I suppose this qualifies as a Unified Field Theory.

  13. Steven James says:

    I am not a physicist, but I’m pretty sure that what makes subatomic particles come together is Strong or Weak Nuclear Binding Force–which is definitely not an electromagnetic field.

    It’s E&M that attracts the electrons to the atom, and that is related to light. But the protons in the nucleus are, as you say, held together by the strong force, which seems to have nothing to do with light. As for the Big Bang, it generated light, although perhaps not immediately (I’m not a cosmologist), but I doubt that light was its cause.

  14. docbill1351

    When I want to pad my resume or impress some chick at the Holiday Inn bar I always mention my American Association for the Advancement of Science membership. Yep, it’s a real turn-on.

    Of course, you get that membership by subscribing to Science magazine. By the same token, when I’m really on a roll, I’ll mention my memberships in the National Geographic Society, Sam’s Club, Barnes & Noble, Starbucks and REI.

  15. William Jennings Bryan was at one time a member of the AAAS.

  16. Steven James – she is probably referring to the fact that photons are the force carriers for the electromagnetic force. As Curmie implies, this force is the one of the four most directly relevant to organic chemistry (her “larger structures”) because chemical bonding is all about eletromagnetic charge. Obviously, you need the weak and strong forces to even have stable atoms – they underlie chemistry – but those forces don’t play a big part in chemical reactions. They are stronger, but too short-range.
    Earth’s gravity is also pretty much irrelevant to chemical reactions, for the opposite reason: its too weak to affect how one atom will bond with another.

  17. retiredsciguy

    @Dave de Vries: Off-topic, but I just saw a David de Vries interviewed on Minneapolis’s KSTP-TV as the proud father of Cole de Vries, pitcher for the Twins making his Major League debut tonight in Chicago against the White Sox. I realize there must be many men named David de Vries in this world, but I was just wonderin’…

  18. Dave de Vries

    No mate, I’m the Aussie comic book guy. Yeah, there’s a few of us out there. Good luck for Cole in his debut.

  19. Mark Joseph

    I guess this puts the kibosh on the idea that ID is a scientific theory, with no religious underpinning, as the DI would like us to believe.