In a recent post, Casey Demonstrates Intelligent Design Theory, we mentioned two things that have just popped up again in a new post at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog. This will be a tale of tortured logic, and sorting these things out requires effort. It was tempting to ignore the new post, but we decided do what we can with it. Every now and then this needs to be done.
Those two things were, first, the Discoveroids’ example of the usefulness of their intelligent design “theory” in helping us figure out the devilishly difficult problem of whether Mt. Rushmore or the Hand of the Desert sculptures are natural or designed. We mentioned an earlier post where they made the same argument — about which we wrote Mt. Rushmore Is Designed, Therefore … — but we didn’t mention that the genius who made that argument was Granville Sewell.
Sewell isn’t a Discoveroid “fellow,” but they publish him, and Wikipedia informs us that Sewell is signatory to the Discovery Institute’s “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism” petition. He’s very keen on using the Second Law of Thermodynamics as an argument for creationism — see Discovery Institute Gives Us Their Best Argument.
Sewell has a new post at the Discoveroids’ blog: Just Too Simple! Needs More Math. While complaining that he gets no respect from scientists, he repeats his Mt. Rushmore and his Second Law of Thermodynamics arguments, and he also makes use of something else we mentioned in a comment to our recent post. That’s relevant enough to repeat here:
With that as an introduction, Here are some excerpts from Sewell’s latest, with bold font added by us:
In an article for Human Events last month, I wrote a very simple introduction to intelligent design, and concluded by pointing out that to not believe in intelligent design, you have to believe that four known fundamental, unintelligent, forces of physics alone (the gravitational, electromagnetic and strong and weak nuclear forces) must have rearranged the fundamental particles of physics into Apple iPhones.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Sewell isn’t the only Discoveroid to make that argument. It’s been made by none other than Bruce Chapman, whom we affectionately call “Chappy.” He’s the founder and president of the Discovery Institute. When Chappy advanced that argument we wrote Chapman: Computers Are Designed, Therefore …?
Why do we bring that up again? Because it illustrates the point we made in the boxed text above. The Discoveroids actually accept as a premise that design is everywhere in the universe, and when they point to something is obviously designed, they’ve clearly shown that everything else is too. Got that? As “proof” of their faith in universal design, all they need to do is point to Mt. Rushmore, or to computers — or as in Sewell’s latest, Apple iPhones — and their work is done. Except that those crazy Darwinists are too stupid to accept the Discoveroids’ logic. That’s what Sewell is complaining about today. Here’s more:
[A]fter all, there is no law of science that forbids unintelligent forces from creating iPhones out of dust here, over a long period. The only law of science — the second law of thermodynamics — which forbids order from arising out of disorder only applies to isolated systems, and the Earth is an open system. The decrease in entropy represented by the creation of iPhones is easily compensated by entropy increases outside the Earth.
Sewell is trying to be clever; he’s ridiculing scientists. Discoveroids are so cute when do that. Let’s read on:
… I published an article, “Entropy and Evolution,” which makes many of the same points, in a more scientific manner, in the peer-reviewed journal BIO-Complexity.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s the Discoveroids’ own, in-house, vanity journal. We posted about it here: Discovery Institute: Creationist “Peer-Review”. Sewell continues:
Unfortunately, BIO-Complexity reviewers, though all well-credentialed academics, are notorious for refusing to discard, a priori, papers that question the scientific consensus on Darwinian evolution. They only seem to be interested in whether or not the logic and science are good. … [S]ome might say that BIO-Complexity is not really a peer-reviewed journal. Anyway, the article was still pretty simple, and hardly used any mathematics.
Despite the brilliance of his argument, Sewell didn’t convince anyone (except the Discoveroids), so he tried again, with more math, but that effort was rejected by a genuine journal. It’s a cruel world, with lots of stupid people. After complaining a bit, Sewell says:
So now I am embarking on a bold new research project. I am going to write a paper on this topic which uses much more advanced mathematics.
That sounds like a nice way for Sewell to spend his time. Here’s the rest of it:
I’m sure I could get the attention of the scientific community, and convince them that a few unintelligent forces of physics alone really can’t rearrange the fundamental particles of physics into Apple iPhones, if I could just figure out how to work some advanced mathematics into the paper. So far I haven’t made much progress. Any suggestions?
That’s how it ends, dear reader. Sewell is perplexed. How could he possibly convince you that “unintelligent forces of physics alone really can’t rearrange the fundamental particles of physics into Apple iPhones”? Are you actually so mindless that you can’t be convinced? Why — oh why! — is Sewell encountering such boneheaded resistance?
Perhaps it’s because you don’t accept the basic premise of the Discoveroids — Everything is designed, and when they point out obvious examples — Mt. Rushmore, etc. — then everything else is too. It’s so simple! What’s wrong with you people?
Copyright © 2014. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.