Creationism


Fine Tuning

A long post at kuro5hin takes apart the most cherished pieces of pseudoscience used to explain Intelligent Design.

A third argument for Intelligent Design is the so-called “Fined-Tuned Universe” argument. If certain physical constants were different, life would not exist, it is argued. For example:

If the strong nuclear force were to have been as little as 2% stronger (relative to the other forces), all hydrogen would have been converted into helium. If it were 5% weaker, no helium at all would have formed and there would be nothing but hydrogen. If the weak nuclear force were a little stronger, supernovas could not occur, and heavy elements could not have formed. If it were slightly weaker, only helium might have formed. If the electromagnetic forces were stronger, all stars would be red dwarfs, and there would be no planets. If it were a little weaker, all stars would be very hot and short-lived. If the electron charge were ever so slightly different, there would be no chemistry as we know it. Carbon (12C) only just managed to form in the primal nucleosynthesis. And so on.” (McMullin 378)

If one were to go fishing and catch 50 fish, all of which were more than ten inches long, one might reasonably make the hypothesis that all of the fish in the lake are more than ten inches long. Someone else might make another hypothesis, that only half the fish in the lake are more than ten inches long. It seems obvious that the first hypothesis is more likely. But what if, upon closer examination, it becomes clear that the net being used to catch the fish had holes that prevented it from catching fish smaller than ten inches, and that the fisherman left it in the water until it had caught 50 fish? This new information must now be incorporated into the hypothesis, causing both to have a likelihood of one, thus preventing one from being more likely than the other.

This situation can be directly applied to the fine-tuned universe argument. It may seem on the surface that the likelihood of a universe in which all of the constants are right for life given an intelligent designer is much higher than the likelihood that the constants are right given random chance. When we add in the fact that we are here to observe the universe, however, we find that the likelihood of a fine-tuned universe is one either way. If we are here we must be in a universe which is tuned to our existence. The likelihood of a fine-tuned universe given that there is an intelligent designer and that we live in a fine tuned universe is equal to the likelihood that we live in a fined tuned universe given that it was created by random chance and that we live in a fine-tuned universe.

Pr(Fine-Tuned Universe | Intelligent Design & Fine-Tuned Universe) = Pr(Fine-Tuned Universe | Chance & Fine-Tuned Universe) = 1

via Slashdot

Technorati tag: ,


ODIN!

Science versus Norse Mythology. In a fair fight the men in the horny helmets win every time.

I would like to issue an official apology to any believers in the Norse faith. I certainly have no wish to get on the wrong side of any Vikings, who historically have not expressed their grievances through letters-to-the-editor. As my friend John Patton pointed out to me, it�s a little foolhardy of me to insult the religion of a seafaring warrior people when I live right on the water.

via Ministry of Information

Technorati tag:


Darwin has a posse

There�s no easy way to admit this. For years, helpful letter writers told us to stick to science. They pointed out that science and politics don�t mix. They said we should be more balanced in our presentation of such issues as creationism, missile defense and global warming. We resisted their advice and pretended not to be stung by the accusations that the magazine should be renamed Unscientific American, or Scientific Unamerican, or even Unscientific Unamerican. But spring is in the air, and all of nature is turning over a new leaf, so there�s no better time to say: you were right, and we were wrong.

From a Scientific American editorial, transcribed by a kind LiveJournal user.

via Worldchanging

Technorati tag: , ,


Big pictures getting smaller

Several science based IMAX movies are having trouble getting into cinemas in the US’ deep south because of fundamentalists objecting to anything that mentions evolution. It’s time for some scientists to turn around and demand the teaching of non-Christian creation myths in religious studies.

Technorati tag: , ,


Devolution in action

Creationism (or Intelligent Design, or whatever name they choose to use to pretend it’s a science) is edging out evolution in America’s classrooms. I feel sorry for all the teachers scared into teaching voodoo when they signed up to broaden young minds. The US is rapidly turning into the richest mediaeval society ever.

Technorati tag:


Unstuck

At last, a US judge with a brain and a backbone! A school district in Georgia has been told to remove idiotic “Evolution is just a theory” stickers from school text books. Someone should start suing to have pagan and other Creation myths taught in religious studies. See how the God botherers like it when told that the Earth was as likely shat out of the great goat’s arse as bodged together in six days by a man with a beard.

Technorati tag:


Going Ape

There’s a Judge Dredd story where a scientist accidentally releases one of his concoctions and the inhabitants of a city block start devolving. The closer to the centre of infection, the farther back along the chain until the scientist himself is nothing more than a blob of protoplasm, which Dredd promptly arrests.

Someone’s let the Dover, Pennsylvania school board get a sniff of the elixir and they’re rapidly turning into amoebae. At least the teachers they’ve ordered to talk up the non-science of Intelligent Design are far enough up the tree to still have backbones.


A sort of manifesto

So, after a longish post lambasting Creationism and Intelligent Design, this morning I found anti-evolution Google ads on Spinneyhead. They’re gone (you can filter out URLs of places you don’t want to be associated with, this has previously been used on sites selling Dubya blow up dolls or somesuch). If mentioning the subject again brings me more I’ll stomp on them as well.

Perhaps I should detail some of the things Spinneyhead likes, so the ads will be targetted properly. Snowboarding’s cool. It’s on my list of a hundred things to do. The last time I was on a snowboard was in January 2002, so I really need a dry slope to open nearer Manchester where I can take a few lessons.

Real Ale. You should know that Spinneyhead likes real ale after the beer fest related posts and pictures. Having said which, there’s a lot of Stella in my parents’ pantry and I’m not too proud….

Cool technology. Almost all technology is cool. One day I’ll be able to buy all the shiny toys I desire. Mobile phone technology in particular, but you really want to go to my-videophone for that.

Peace love and understanding. What’s so wrong with that? Especially as it’s Christmas.

Bikes. Cannondale, Marin, Trek, Orange. Actually, I’d really like a Raleigh Chopper, just for old times sake.

And, of course, sheep. How could I not mention sheep.


Dolphins were Monkeys that didn't like the land

I reckon Creationists actually present strong evidence to support evolution, being more closely related to monkeys thanm the rest of us. Famous evangelical cartoonist Jack Chick has weighed into the subject with Big Daddy?, a comic which inadvertantly shows how ludicrous the Creationist/ Intelligent Design argument is.

Faced with the “six basic concepts of evolution”, our hero contends that only one- micro evolution, the only one occuring over an observable period rather than aeons- can be called “science”. All else is “faith”. In which case, you might as well ignore hundreds of years of work by some of the greatest human minds and choose the Bible instead, even though it contains dubious history at best and was compiled by men who weren’t present to suit their own political agendas.

The really sad thing is that beliefs such as ID are being given so much more airtime than they deserve. It’s not a science, not even a bad science, if it is to be taught then stick it in with all the other creation myths where it belongs rather than biology classes.

via BoingBoing

(Lyrics from “Dolphins were Monkeys” by Ian Brown)

[Crossposted from Monitor Duty]


Dolphins were Monkeys

The Creationists are coming! It seems the White House nowadays only likes science if it’s used to create new and interesting ways to disperse depleted uranium. Through careful ommissions and very biased ‘fair play’ they’re allowing such pieces of faux science as Intelligent Design onto the curriculum. Even worse, they’ll let Africans have cheap anti-AIDS drugs (though they’d much rather be selling them expensive ones), but condemn any program that would promote condom use even though this would mean fewer would contract HIV in the first place!


Bookshelf

Just started- King Solomon’s Mines, H. Rider Haggard

Just finished- Brightness Reef, David Brin This is a well written piece of sci fi, with interesting aliens and a strange but logically ordered culture and neat shifts in emphasis to show which story thread you’re in. But I have some pretty major problems with it. For one thing, it’s part one of a trilogy. I’m not one of life’s trilogy readers , and by half way through the book, it wasobvious that everyone was settling in for the long run.

The other big problem is the whole premise of ‘Uplift’, the phenomenon that links all the races in the book. Uplift is the process whereby super intelligent, glory motivated aliens take a race on the verge of sentience and nudge it along until it can form societies and reach for the stars. They have to do this, you see, because evolution alone cannot possibly result in such intelligence. This looks to me like nothing more than dressed up Intelligent Design, itself a dubious attempt to wrap Creationism up in pseudoscience so that it can be taught in schools.