The Discovery Institute has posted a new article by Granville Sewell. He’s not a Discoveroid “fellow,” but Wikipedia informs us that he’s a signatory to the Discovery Institute’s “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism” petition. Sewell is very keen on using the Second Law of Thermodynamics as an argument for creationism — see Discovery Institute Gives Us Their Best Argument.
Our last post about Granville was Intelligent Design Is So Obvious, in which he declared:
[When] you seriously consider the possibility that all the magnificent species in the living world, and the human body and the human brain, could be entirely the products of unintelligent forces, you have been in academia too long and have lost contact with reality — you have lost your mind.
Granville’s latest article at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog is Why Should Evolutionary Biology Be So Different? It’s from his new book, Christianity for Doubters (Amazon listing). The publisher is Resource Publications, which produces books for religious study — exactly the sort of thing one would expect from a prominent Discoveroid. Here are some excerpts from Granville’s post, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
In the current debate between Darwinism and intelligent design, the strongest argument made by Darwinists is this: in every other field of science, naturalism has been spectacularly successful, why should evolutionary biology be so different?
That’s our strongest argument? We thought it was that we have evidence, while creationists have none. But we’re always willing to learn, so let’s read on. He quotes Joseph LeConte (1823 – 1901), a geologist who wrote in 1888 (only six years after Darwin died) that:
species seem to come in suddenly, with all their specific characters perfect, remain substantially unchanged as long as they last, and then die out and are replaced by others. Certainly this looks much like immutability of specific forms, and supernaturalism of specific origin.
[Nevertheless, we] are confident that evolution is absolutely certain … The origins of new phenomena are often obscure, even inexplicable, but we never think to doubt that they have a natural cause; for so to doubt is to doubt the validity of reason, and the rational constitution of Nature.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! That’s Sewell’s authority? He continues:
Even most scientists who doubt the Darwinist explanation for evolution are confident that science will eventually come up with a more plausible explanation. That’s the way science works, if one theory fails, we look for another one; why should evolution be so different? Many people believe that intelligent design advocates just don’t understand how science works, and are motivated entirely by religious beliefs.
Jeepers — why would we think such a thing? Here’s more:
Well, perhaps the following story will help critics of intelligent design to understand why evolution is different.
Anyone who claims to have a scientific explanation for how unintelligent agents like tornados might be able to turn rubble into houses and cars would be expected to produce some powerful evidence, if they want their theory to be taken seriously. The burden of proof should be equally heavy on those who claim to have a scientific explanation for how a few unintelligent forces of physics alone could rearrange the basic particles of physics into computers and encyclopedias and Apple iPhones — and there is no evidence that natural selection of random mutations can explain anything other than very minor adaptations.
Amazing, isn’t it? Well, that may have been a popular view in 1888. Then he says:
My question to those who treat evolution as just another scientific problem is this: can you now at least understand why some of us feel that evolution is a fundamentally different and much more difficult problem than others solved by science, and requires a fundamentally different type of explanation?
Well, dear reader, now do you understand Granville’s frustration with your dogmatic Darwinism? His final paragraph is a reference to an article he wrote for the Discoveroids’ in-house journal, BIO-Complexity. We’ll leave it to you to visit the Discoveroids’ blog where Granville provides a link to that impressive article.
This is where we leave the Discoveroids today. We really don’t know what universe they inhabit, but it’s nowhere we want to be.
Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.