This is the latest from the Discovery Institute: Objection to Intelligent Design — Universe Is Too Big, with Too Much “Wasted Space”. It was written by David Klinghoffer, a Discoveroid “senior fellow” (i.e., flaming, full-blown creationist), who eagerly functions as their journalistic slasher and poo flinger. We’ll give you a few excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis.
Klinghoffer mentions an objection to the Discoveroids’ “theory” of intelligent design — that “the vastness of it all has led some skeptics to ask, why would God waste so much space on so few living creatures? Is this really a mark of intelligent design?”
That’s a good question. The universe described in the bible is a much more cozy arrangement, with the Earth created as the only world in existence, in the center of what seemed to be a rather limited universe, consisting of only the Sun and the Moon, with the stars as lights set in a presumably solid firmament rotating around us, just below the glorious realm of Yahweh, from which he could look down upon us and receive our adoration.
Klinghoffer responds to the problem of what seems to be a uselessly immense universe by telling us:
[A] vast universe is a key component in at least one line of argument for intelligent design. … [T]his argument points to the unique fitness of the universe and of our planet for upright bipeds like ourselves.
What? Does that make any sense? Klinghoffer explains:
The whole thing appears set up for us, and only for us. The vaster the cosmos, the more dramatically that point is underlined.
He claims that Michael Denton, a Discovery Institute “senior fellow,” has the answer:
Denton’s current focus is on the fitness of the universe for fire-using creatures like us. See the short documentary Fire-Maker. [Link in Klinghoffer’s post.]
We haven’t seen that “documentary,” so we may be at a disadvantage here, but we doubt it. Then Klinghoffer quotes from an earlier Discoveroid blog article — always a powerfully persuasive source — which says:
ID critics often end up playing the role of naïve theologian: What they “seem to want is a metric with The Human Body as God Would (or Should) Have Made It at one end of the measuring stick. … [C]ontemporary Darwinian evolutionary thinking borrows heavily from theology for its justification.” In this case it should be The Universe as God Would (or Should) Have Made It.
Yes, dear reader. When you suggest that the universe seems far too big for the concept of intelligent design, you’re behaving like a naïve theologian. That’s something the Discoveroids would never do. Let’s read on:
I’d want to ask [these critics], is it like going to the mall and looking for a pair of pants with the right waist and inseam measurements? 91 billion light-years is too big to be intelligently designed. Is there a size that would be too small? Just right?
Yeah — what’s the right size that the intelligent designer — blessed be he! — should have made the universe? You don’t have an answer, do you? This is the end of Klinghoffer’s post:
Merely to ask such questions is to see how absurd the contention is that the universe has too much “wasted space.”
In other words, whatever may be the size of the universe, that’s exactly the way the designer did it. Case closed.
Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.