Once again our entertainment comes from the Discovery Institute — which indicates the total absence of actual creationist news in the world. Anyway, the latest gem at their creationist blog is titled Watch: The Multiverse Is Some Scientists’ “God of the Gaps”. It was written by Klinghoffer. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
The “God of the gaps” label is a favorite with critics of intelligent design.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! It’s a “favorite” only in the sense that it’s a fallacy used all the time by creationists, so those of us on the science side of the debate often mention that it’s being used again. Anyway, Klinghoffer says:
It’s a fallacy, of course, since ID theory appeals not to what we don’t know but to what we do know about how creative and intelligent agents operate.
Amazing, isn’t it? More than amazing, it’s revolting. Let’s get serious here. Wikipedia’s article on God of the gaps says:
“God of the gaps” is a theological perspective in which gaps in scientific knowledge are taken to be evidence or proof of God’s existence.
God of the gaps is one of the principal arguments of creationists, and we point this out all the time. That bothers them, and sometimes they deny what they are so obviously doing. A good example is this from several years ago: Klinghoffer: “We Don’t Use God of the Gaps”. If you need any incentive to read it, we used Discoveroid logic to explain the origin of the female breast. But we apologize for the digression. Returning to the topic of the day, Klinghoffer tells us:
But it’s not the case that debates about ID are free of appeals to a “Gaps” deity. Philosopher and scientist Kirk Durston identifies “Science’s ‘god’ of the gaps”:
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Yes, it’s the folks on the science side of the debate who use a god of the gaps. Klinghoffer continues:
By “science” he means a rigid, question-begging notion of scientific thinking. [Huh?] As biologist Eugene Koonin put it, “By showing that highly complex systems, actually, can emerge by chance and, moreover are inevitable, if extremely rare, in the universe, the present model sidesteps the issues of irreducibility and leaves no room whatsoever for intelligent design.”
Fortunately there’s just a little bit left to the Discoveroid post. Here it comes:
This brand of scientific ideology requires a “God of the gaps” — Koonin’s “present model” — to explain away mysteries like the origin of life. And it finds its God, as Durston explains, in the form of the multiverse.
The multiverse? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! And that, boys and girls, is how you rebut claims that your “science” of intelligent design relies on the god of the gaps. Oh, we almost forgot — there’s some kind of video you can watch at the Discoveroid post, titled Science’s ‘god’ of the gaps.. Watch it at your own risk.
Copyright © 2021. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.