Discoveroids: The Designer Created Science

The Discovery Institute has found a book by a non-Discoveroid that has them all excited, and they just posted Melissa Cain Travis Introduces the “Maker Thesis”. It was written by Sarah Chaffee, whom we call “Savvy Sarah.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

Consider surgery today. Physicians perform a myriad of different types of procedures, and patients enjoy a high likelihood of survival. … And life expectancies overall have been rising around the world as better hygiene and technology advance. Our ancestors would be astonished.

Okay, now what? Savvy Sarah says:

Certainly, in contemplating the achievements of research and medicine, we are right to feel surprised, humbled, or ecstatic. In her new book, Science and the Mind of the Maker [Amazon link], Melissa Cain Travis argues that wonder is in order, all the more so, when we think about the Source [their capital letter] of science itself.

Ooooooooooooh! What is the “Source” of science? Savvy Sarah tells us:

She presents a compelling case for Christian theism based on design in the universe, demonstrating that the natural world points to a beauty beyond itself. [Yes — oh yes!] Travis, who teaches at Houston Baptist University, defines the theme of her book as the “Maker Thesis.” What is this?

She quotes Travis (with her brackets):

[C]ertain discoveries of the natural sciences support the inference that there is a Mind behind the universe with whom we share kinship, and suggest that this Mind intended the success of the natural sciences.

Ooooooooooooh! There’s a “Mind” behind the universe!

By the way, at the Amazon link for Travis’ book, they tell us about her:

Melissa Cain Travis is an Assistant Professor of Christian Apologetics at Houston Baptist University and serves on the Contributing Writers team at Christian Research Journal. She earned a Master of Arts in Science and Religion from Biola University and a Bachelor of Science in Biology from Campbell University [ affiliated with the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina].

Great credentials! Let’s get back to Savvy Sarah. She informs us:

I am a Christian too, and so I heartily agree with all of Travis’s message in Science and the Mind of the Maker. However, those who do not share these beliefs should still appreciate the broader theme of intelligent design and the scientific evidence for it.

The book presents the scientific evidence for intelligent design. Very exciting!

We’ll skip a lot because we know you’re going to read the Discoveroid post for yourself. Here’s the end of Savvy Sarah’s post:

Science and the Mind of the Maker would be a great book for those who want to look beyond the latest scientific discoveries to the meaning of it all. Perhaps this could be a first or second book someone might read on origins science, before jumping into a volume specifically on biology or cosmology.

If you, dear reader, want to know the meaning of it all, this is the book for you! It’s recommended by the Discoveroids, so how can you go wrong?

Copyright © 2018. 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

18 responses to “Discoveroids: The Designer Created Science

  1. Once again, why would an omnipotent creator bother with restricting creation to follow the laws of science?
    And then, if the laws of science make life possible, what gap is there for an omnipotent creator to fill in?

  2. Not worth a pixel of rebuttal.

  3. Especially given that a lot of creation is pretty nasty! “Let us in awe at the wonderous Mind that created the parasitic wasp whose larva consumes a living human eye”. Praise Teh Lawd!

  4. Michael Fugate

    Science and the Mind of the Maker – starts out as the usual quotes from people I like and don’t like – avoiding saying anything herself, but setting the tone – atheists are bad and pit science against religion. Never mentioning the theists who do the same.

    Here’s her webpage:
    She has written a series of apologetics for children
    How Do We Know God Is Really There?
    How Do We Know God Created Life?
    How Do We Know Jesus is Alive?
    Endorsed by Biola professors! Must be good.

  5. Michael Fugate

    You can also get this book from the same press by an author also at HBU
    Lots of sneering about evolution from an English prof. impressed? – it is as if they just keep writing the exact same book over and over and over – projecting their actions onto to everyone else without the least understanding.

  6. Ah, Johannes Kepler, mathematician, astronomer, and astrologer.
    Wouldn’t exactly say he’s the best choice regarding an intelligent design supporter per se, but he’s typical of the thinking of that period, thus understandable that he’s was selected by the book’s author.
    Nice Wikipedia bio of Kepler, interesting, some weird ideas, problems with religion, etc.

  7. evidence for intelligent design
    I assume that there is some description of “intelligent design”. Otherwise it wouldn’t make any sense to talk about “evidence for” it.
    At a minimum, several of: what, when, where, who, how, why.

  8. “look beyond the latest scientific discoveries to the meaning of it all”
    Yawn. Last 150 years lots of christians have looked beyond the latest developments of Evolution Theory to the meaning of it all. The IDiots from Seattle apparently try less and less.

    @TomS: “Otherwise it wouldn’t make any sense to talk about “evidence for” it.”
    Only as long as the IDiots uphold their smokescreen that they’re doing science, not theology. That seems something of the past.

  9. If Science developed out of Religion, why are there still Creationists?

  10. “Natural sciences?” What other kind is there? How can you share kinship with a “Mind [sic] behind the universe?” That’s like saying you have a meaningful relationship with someone (even a loved one) who no longer exists. You can have memories, which hold meaning, and genes, but that’s all material stuff.

    This is all fantasy projection on Melissa Cain Travesty’s part, and Savvy Sarah just blithely goes along with it.

    “Lose the Source, Sarah. Lose the Source.”

  11. @ChrisS is a bit confused: “What other kind is there?”
    Social sciences and humanoria.
    To be called science they need, just like the natural sciences, accept methodological naturalism (this is a necessary, not a sufficient condition). Now it’s easier especially in the humanoria to introduce supernatural stuff and pretend that you’re still doing science, but as we all know it’s the wet dream of all creationists to do that with biology as well (and the not entirely unknown Sir Isaac Newton did it with physics).
    All sciences are naturalistic, but not all sciences are natural. Only physics, chemistry and biology are.

  12. Karl Goldsmith (@KarlGoldsmith)

    So they like a creationist book.

  13. Humanoria
    That’s the first time I’ve seen that word.
    I think that the ordinary English term is humanities.
    As far as social sciences, SC will not respond favorably. Yet I think that a reasonable person can accept at least linguistics today as a science not a physical science.

  14. @Michael Fugate: the same answer works for all of her questions in the three book titles you list: “we don’t”

  15. Michael Fugate

    Those books are from a YEC homeschool press – so you know its the truth.

  16. Michael Fugate

    Here is MCT’s likely exposure to evolution
    from the Campbell catalog
    BIOL 351 – Creation, Evolution, or Both?
    An investigation into the origins of life, using an integrated scientific and Christian perspective. Coverage includes the scientific method, the philosophy of science, the relationship of science and religion, the history of evolutionary theory, the science behind evolutionary theory, the history of creationism, young-earth creationism, intelligent design, and major creationist objections to evolutionary theory, focusing on the geological record and earth history. Three lecture hours per week. Occasional Fall semesters.

  17. Christian theism, huh.

    Well, I’m sure that each and every one of the 4-odd billion people living in Asia will agree with Melissa on that.

  18. Michael Fugate

    Sarah’s definition of truth = whatever Sarah believes to be true.