Sunday, September 2, 2012

Intelligent Design vs Guided Evolution and real science

I am a christian. I believe God created Heaven and Earth. I believe that He made the stars, planets and matter that make up our galaxy. I believe we are his children, made in his image. I also don't believe in Intelligent Design. Confused?

Don't be. Intelligent Design is not what you may think it is. It is a specific set of beliefs, not a blanket name for Creationism. It is propagated by a specific entity called the Discovery Institute, a christian conservative organization. In theory it is a scientifically based view not influenced by any belief, faith, religion  or preconceptions. In reality it is a christian religious agenda based primarily on a specific interpretation of The Bible. It is best summed up in a quote from them: "Certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." Intelligent design is NOT the only  form of creationism. It does NOT represent all christianity, and definitely not all creationists. In my opinion Intelligent Design is limited and dangerously restricting as well as misleading, as it is often thought to be the be only christian answer. Let's look at it flaws from both a christian and scientific stand-point.

Intelligent Design limits God

One of the first flaws of Intelligent Design that comes to our notice is that it is dependent on a single fixed view of God. Let us return to this quote: "Certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." There seems to be an assumption here that God can't direct natural selection, that he must use His direct power. Think about it - it's stating that the "intelligent cause" would not use certain types of creation. Albert Einstein once said "As I have said so many times, God doesn't play dice with the world." (I know I'm taking that out of context), I say God can play dice if he wants, he knows how they will fall. He can always roll sixes if he wants, they are His dice. He knows the end from the beginning. He has the fore-knowledge to be able to set things up so that "A" causes "B" which causes "C" and so on. To our mortal minds it may at first seem like a random process, because we don't know enough to predict the results out of the infinite possible ends. Our minds are not advanced enough to even grasp that. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:9 KJV) I believe God can use evolution as a powerful self-regulating tool.

Intelligent Design is not scientific

There have been no unbiased experiments conducted, no whitepapers published and it has never presented a body of proof sufficient to be taken seriously by the scientific community. Much of what they say hinges on flawed analogies, like the watchmaker analogy - which would be valid if we were talking about mechanical things and not biology. Every specific argument for Intelligent design has fallen prey to research. For example: Bacterial Flagella. These are small hair-like protrusions from bacterial cells that rotate, providing propulsion. Proponents state that the flagella are too complex to have simply evolved; they must be created. A partial flagella serves no purpose and would not provide an advantage. After the the proponents of Intelligent Design made this claim, it was shown that a poison spur on a similar type of bacteria were one protein short of a rotating flagella. In short, it was obvious how it evolved with a single mutation. It is clear that they have much to do and prove to be taken seriously as a viable theory.

Intelligent Design is dangerous to the future of science

I see it as deliberately blind view that things are what they are because God made it that way and that is that, stating that if you don't understand something you should ascribe it to God and call it done. This bugs me on many levels. I want to know how God created the universe. Yes, stating that God made it is true, stating that all things are His handiwork is valid, but not even trying to find out why - proclaiming it to be a dogma that science cannot and should not probe does not rest well with me. If you say that, you fall into the same stagnant trap that forces good people to chose between their faith and logic. It pushes all we do not yet understand into the untouchable realm of God's power. This is not right. Galileo ran up against a system like that. One cannot define science by religion, what exists is what is and deserves to be seen as that. Scripture is vague. In Galileo's time people believed that heaven had perfect spheres called planets. They were symmetrical and geometrically perfect. Along came a scientist who had evidence to the contrary. Today we understand that the Catholic church read into the scriptures things that were not there; they added to their dogma things with no scriptural basis. May I point out that scripture does not state "and verily He poofeth the earth and animals into existence fully formed in an instant."

Science must be allowed to postulate freely. Part of the scientific method is to observe objectively, not within the restrictions of dogma or ANY preconception.

So what do I think happened?

It's fairly simple. This video (you don't HAVE to watch it, but it comes recommended) has some real gold in it. It is produced by Sal Khan, founder of Khan academy.


In this, he states that a self-regulating universe speaks to a more profound God. The very fact that we continue to improve and grow shows that God is not done. The work of God is endless - endless number of creations, endless improvement of His creations and creations that have no end. The form may change, but matter (by the laws we know) can neither be created nor destroyed. Sal Khan also spoke of fractals. I imagine that God would know every whorl that a fractal would have in it in all its infinite complexity before it was done. If you think of the universe as a fractal, things start to get interesting.

We are at the Big Bang. God has looked across all the possible universes, all the infinite combinations and all the ends and chosen the one he wanted. The bang starts. Space and time are warped, the very concepts don't exist yet. As the universe expands, the laws God has chosen snap into place. The electromagnetic force is stronger than gravity. Dark energy, inertia and heat forces everything apart. Antimatter and matter cancel each-other out. In this improbable universe there is a tiny bit more matter. It is not evenly dispersed. As God planned, the irregularities cause it to collapse into clouds then stars. These live and die, they explode into heavier elements, seeding the universe with minerals needed for life. New stars form. Some organize planets in orbit around them from the heavy elements that were scattered. Some form life that grows and evolves into what we see today. God uses this genetic soup as the raw material to create his children on this and other worlds.

Some of these children stand and see the order and patterns and state "this must be the work of a God, I have my faith so I need look no further," others stand and see the same and say "I see how this was done, it must not be the work of a God, I'll look further." Then there are some of us who say "I believe it was God who made it. He is a God of order, let us see how he did it."

I live in wonder of the wisdom and power of God. This world of ours is beautiful and complicated beyond our current understanding, but I would love to understand as much as a mortal is able.

2 comments:

  1. very good analysis. though with all that i still fail to see the point of even needing a god in that equation. you point out that everything works via natural laws and systems but then say a god did it. Why at this point is god needed in the explanation?
    As a side to this kind of debate, i was listening to a creationist ramble about abiogenesis, and how we can't have life from non-life. then it hit me, we are made of nothing but nonlife. we are complex series of chemical reactions if things we view as not being alive. so why are they now considered alive when in this form working in unison? enjoy this poem --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for commenting. As for your question: I have no scientific proof that God exists. I can't find a way to say "Look, here is incontrovertible that a deity started the cosmos." nor will I try. Anytime anyone tries to prove God exists via scientific means or the lack of understanding of science you fall into the intelligent design trap. I don't think we will ever find that evidence without being omniscient ourselves. There needs to be separation of science and faith, although they can work hand in hand.
      I have faith for reasons that have nothing to do with science. Little miracles, feeling the spirit, hope and some deep personal experiences that I don't plan to go into here all speak to that. Let's just say I have faith in God because I've felt the Holy Ghost in my life. As for the need for God, I only have speculation and theories.
      The Higgs field fills our universe with "virtual particles", small things that don't actually exist. They fill every micron of space only long enough to influence some particles on a quantum level. To study one and detect it in the Atlas detector, it needed to be given the energy to be "real". It is my personal hypothesis (please remember that this is a fluid opinion that will change and is untrained, untried and for the most part un-researched) that our universe was much the same as a Higgs Boson, unreal, virtual and without substance, until it was "created" or imbued with energy needed to exist. God created the laws of physics, and all that there is as a fractal equation.
      As for the life thing, I know right? We are just an on-going chemical reaction. But "cognito ergo sum" is my response, and part of the reason for my faith. I'll check out your poem soon.
      Thanks again for the response.

      Delete