A Boy Has Mastered All of Intelligent Design

Once again, dear reader, we visited the creationist blog of the Discovery Institute, and look what we found. It’s titled Watch: Kid Explains Intelligent Design to His Dad, and 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]:

Over the past weekend at our Dallas Conference on Science and Faith, YouTube video producer Joel Park [Ooooooooooooh! A YouTube video producer!] let us know about this: a video with his son Tor [That’s the kid’s name?] in which the young gentleman walks his dad through a detailed account of the arguments in Stephen Meyer’s Signature in the Cell.

Wowie — a kid named Tor is teaching Discoveroid stuff to his father. Then Klinghoffer says:

Get ready to be impressed. [We’re ready!] The kid is 14 years old [Gasp!] and it seems clear that he’s got a future ahead of him as a communicator. The father-son rapport is very cute, too.

The kid is almost guaranteed to become a Discoveroid Fellow! Klinghoffer continues:

They cover, among other things, what distinguishes intelligent design from creationism [That’s always been a mystery!], what information is and what forms it takes [Information? See Phlogiston, Vitalism, and Information!], what that has to do with DNA, what’s the difference between a deduction and an inference, the RNA World theory, panspermia, the multiverse [Gasp!], and more.

All that in one video? Amazing! Let’s read on:

The lucidity of the younger individual’s grasp of ID, his ability to concisely explain it, is quite something. Tor could probably help out in tutoring some adult ID critics I can think of.

That’s all there is to Klinghoffer’s post — except for an embedded video which is probably Tor’s lecture to his father. Go ahead, watch the thing. The kid may convince you to become a Discoveroid.

Copyright © 2022. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

10 responses to “A Boy Has Mastered All of Intelligent Design

  1. I used to look down on people like the phlogiston guy and the luminiferous aether guy and the Ptolomy dude. But they were doing their best with what fewer shoulders they had to stand on. All a part of science growing up. Now I look up to them and wish I had half the brains they did. Disco-toots have no excuse other than literally wingnuts. Phooey on those guys.

  2. OK, so I took the bait while my dinner was cooking in the oven and wonderful, aromatic smells permeated the kitchen, to watch the video. I got about 4 minutes in before I let out a primal scream. When the kid described evolution … that was it. I can’t fault the kid for being a proto-IDiot but it’s almost grounds for calling child protective services for what this kid is being exposed to. Total creationist propaganda. As someone once said, “not even wrong.” Yes, the kid should get a merit badge for “Strawman Making.”

    It was pitiful, but this is what we can expect from the Tooters. The kid is not even a high school grad. He hasn’t taken a real biology class. He is simply unaware of the wealth of biology, chemistry, math, physics and more that is out there. And here he is reading (so he says, and I can’t imagine an 8th Grader reading Meyer’s schlock “signature” garbage and understanding even a fraction of it) a book of fiction posing as science, but having absolutely, zero, nada, nothing of a background to possibly evaluate Meyer’s BS.

    So, it’s an entirely insipid and stupid exploitation of a kid for who knows what reason but his Dad should be castigated for sure.

  3. Dave Luckett

    “You (Tor) recently read a book”. Well, that’s a step forward. I wonder if he’d be prepared to read another?

    One early blooper. Dad says, “It (ID) doesn’t contest a six-day creation.” True, it doesn’t. It doesn’t contest a old Earth or a young Earth, either. It has nothing whatsoever to say about when, where, how, how many times, by what means, over what period, or with what purpose, the Intelligent Designer operated. All it says is, “Evolution is wrong”. That’s it. That’s all of it.

    “We’re definitely not scientists”. No, you’re not. This is a bug, not a feature.

    Junior goes on to retail the desperately moronic notion he has about – not evolution – but the origin of life. He demonstrates thereby that he has never seen a genuine account given by a real scientist – not one who worked in the field in the last sixty years, anyway. It would be risible, except that it’s pitiful. Sigh. Let’s get on.

    “You can’t go back in time and view the event as it happened”. Score one for Ken Ham’s “Were you there?” But the kid actually does manage to grasp an idea that Ken can’t: that you can use evidence to infer what happened. Kid then attempts to suggest that evolution used to be a good explanation of what has happened, but new evidence makes intelligent design a better inference. There’s plenty of new evidence, all right, but none that points to that.

    Father drags him back to the origin of life. “What specific evidence for the ORIGIN OF LIFE is it?” he asks, thus tacitly abandoning the entire history of life after its origin to evolution.

    So the kid parrots the nonsense he was purveyed: “DNA has so much information”. That’s it. That’s all. And kid can’t imagine something that has that much information arising naturally. Thus, the failures of his imagination, and his ignorance of what is biochemically possible, are taken as evidence in themselves.

    Dad agrees, of course. “There had to be a mind, a purpose,” he says. No, Dad, there didn’t have to be. We’ve been over and over this. You’ve had it explained to you by experts. You don’t get it, you can’t get it, you’re contractually obligated not to get it. Onwards!

    The nucleotides are not constrained to relate to each other. Uh, so? That is, their arrangement can change. We call the changes “mutations”, and those that defeat the purpose of replication are automatically culled. This accounts for success in replication. That’s what specifies the information. It is specified as useful for replication. Simple as that. No designer, no mind, is required for this process.

    It gets really embarrassing after that. The chicken and the egg problem, for Pete’s sake. The fact that this is an Achilles race with the tortoise type paradox has not occurred to Tor, probably because he has never heard of it. Or Achilles, either. That is, it’s a theoretical construct disputing observed reality. But the fact is… a fact, anyway. Achilles beats the tortoise. The egg and the chicken both exist, and both came first, or neither. They aren’t real problems. Neither is the question of what came first, DNA or life.

    “A functioning replicase cannot come from natural selection”. This is another version of, “we don’t exactly know how it emerged, so it must have been Designer, read God”. The whole passage is an example of an old creationist discourse, which goes like this:

    1. Ask how something happened.

    If answered, 2. Demand more details,

    If answered, repeat 2 UNTIL
    ;
    3. The limits of knowledge are reached. NB: This always happens. Knowledge is always limited.

    4. When you finally get to the unknown, say, “See, you don’t know. So it can’t be natural, and it must be (God). Therefore, I win.” and do the victory dance.

    Panspermia, now. Embarrassing, did I say? It gets worse. Multiverse theory! Boltzmann brains! Enough. Flesh and blood has its limits, and I’ve just hit mine.

    Neither of them appear even to be cognizant of the fact that they have conceded the entire history of life since its inception to evolution. The kid almost certainly hasn’t thought that far, but he might learn. His father, not so much.

    Mark Twain wrote: “When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.” I doubt that young Troy will have the same experience.

  4. Ted Herrlich

    I am imagining some poor biology teacher in the near future having to deal with this kid in class.

  5. @Dave L

    I can see the future. Y’all knew that already, right? The young lad reminded me of my Freshman roommate in college. Pot luck – my bad luck and he had no pot. Here I was a brilliant, arrogant, know-it-all, science geek who carried two slide rules, JUST IN CASE, and read the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics for fun (Oooooh, boiling point of helium … frosty!), paired with a dense, way overly happy, part human – part cocker spaniel, Jesus loving Bible thumper from Lint Navel, Missouri – yee haw!

    Oh, how I enjoyed tormenting him with actual knowledge. “So, you see, Bucko, that reptile jaw bone is now in you effing ear!” I thought he would burst into flames.

    He dropped out his second year while I moved on to greater things and eventually became quite unknown. I did learn the rest of the story, however. Apparently, some young woman, who should be canonized, srsly, took pity and devirginized the lad. Having tasted the fruit of sin, so to speak, he moved with her to Colorado, became a ski bum and sold dope to buy lift tickets.

    I say that Dad should do the kid a favor and buy him some ski lessons. Save time.

  6. Now some not-creationist people are commenting on the video. Imagine the shock boy and dad will feel when they realize they have been duped by the ID people. Haha just kidding everyone always doubles down, lol.

  7. Puck Mendelssohn

    As it is written: “and a little child shall mislead them.”

  8. “God did it.”
    He mastered three words that encompass ID. Wow

  9. @Dave L
    Even before I saw any of the video, I was going to mention that we always had a joke that when you’re 14 you know everything. And in this case “everything” is pretty much what your Dad with a religious YouTube channel is given you. So all the early denying that intelligent designer isn’t the “Grand Ol’ Designer” is of course b.s.