Michael Ruse classifies creation science as pseudoscience. Additionally, what makes creation science so unattractive is that it is completely void of the possibility of being falsifiable unless the antecedent conditions (the interpretation) have been falsified. This makes the issue of accounting for anomalies so absurd that creation science doesn’t really account for anomalies; rather, it produces extreme ad hoc explanations to account for contradictions to its theory. There’s a distinction between anomalies and refutations. Refutations are falsifiers. Additionally, scientific theories are true regardless of any religious understanding. Religious belief, like I mentioned earlier, begs the question on certain scientific matters. Religious belief, when used as a hermeneutic for interpreting scientific data and developing scientific theories, is also a controversial methodology. Its appeal to method isn’t necessarily objective (as close to objectivity can be) and is not commonly accepted (though not to be used as an argumentum ad populum).
Michael Ruse on Creation Science
Neo-Darwinism
Evolution has many meanings.
- Change over time
- Evolution of the cosmos
- Evolution of living things
- Evolution of culture, technology, etc.
- Changes within existing species
- Morphological (anatomical)
- Genetic (change in gene frequencies)
- Common ancestry
- Within a species
- Descent of all species from a common ancestor
- Darwinian evolution
Darwinism: Descent with modification through unguided processes
- Descent: “I view all beings not as special creations, but as the lineal descendants of some few beings which lived long ago.”
- Modification: “The preservation of favorable individual differences of variations, and the destruction of those which are injurious (natural selection).”
- Unguided processes: “There seems to be no more design in the variability of organic beings, and in the action of natural selection, than in the course which the wind blows. So I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of chance.”
read more »
Darwinian Whale Evolution
When evaluating population drift/evolution one must keep in mind a pattern/process distinction.
- To be explained: A pattern of a sequence of ancestors to present (a phylogenetic sequence)
- Explanation: High random mutation rates + high selection coefficients –> Incremental genetic change over time (“evolution”)
We now know that the majority of anatomical changes unique to fully aquatic cetaceans (Pelagiceti) appeared during just a few million years.
Here are only a few of the changes that had to have occurred during the transition to a fully marine whale
- Counter-current heat exchanger for intra-abdominal testes
- Ball vertebra
- Tail flukes and musculature
- Blubber for temperature insulation
- Ability to drink sea water (reorganization of kidney tissues)
- Reverse orientation of fetus in the uterus
- Nurse young underwater (modified mammae)
read more »
An Objection to Intelligent Design I’ve Never Heard
I was in a tweebate (tweet debate) with another person [whom shall remain anonymous] over a previous post of mine where I claimed that Ken Miller’s argument against irreducible complexity was a bad argument (I really don’t like Twitter debates/conversations either). This person went on about how Miller’s argument convinced Judge Jones and my position was that it’s actually quite embarrassing that the argument would convince anyone (see my post for the context). Then he claimed the type three secretory system is an objection to irreducible complexity in the bacterial flagellum, which prompted me to claim that it may indeed be IC itself and there are arguments that the flagellum may have come first. Anyways, those aren’t what interests me. The argument that I had never heard before was:
ID claims are anything but modest. Incapacity to imagine other explanations of our beginnings is not evidence of ID. Non sequitur.
Let me be clear, I have never claimed anywhere at any time… ever… that one should be a proponent of intelligent design because of an incapacity to imagine other explanations. So first of all, this argument belongs in a cornfield scaring away the crows. Secondly, this is an utterly blatant attack on my imagination! I’ve got a great imagination! (Okay, the second point isn’t really a part of my argument.) It’s true, if anyone did make an argument for ID based on a lack of imagination it would be a non sequitur since one’s capacity to imagine something has nothing to do with the truth claim (as long as the claim is sound/rational, I cannot imagine the actualization of a contradiction). I’m fairly confident anyone familiar with intelligent design and the state of the evolution controversy would never make an argument for intelligent design like this. In fact, no one should ever make such an argument for ID like this.
I’ve explained before in my post on God and Darwinism, the reasons why I’m not a Darwinist are for two reasons: 1) the origin of information must be mind and 2) there is objective teleology in the world and primarily human beings. I do believe the argument from irreducible complexity is a good argument for ID but I’m not going to die on that hill. I think intelligent causation is a legitimate scientific hypothesis and explanation. However, there are certain philosophical truths that press the argument. I could care less if man evolved from a common ancestor but this evolution could not have occurred without a mind acting on the origin of the information in DNA and I believe man [evolves] with an end goal in mind. That’s why I reject Darwinism.
Equipping Christians: Must Read Science Books
I’ve provided a list of recommended books that will hopefully aid you in having a foundational Christian worldview by being knowledgeable in many fields. Today I’ve provided a list of my top ten recommended science books.
10. The Oxford Companion Series: These books are quick and easy to read set up in a dictionary format for easy reference. When you come across terms like inflationary perturbations you have something to help you understand what it is you’re dealing with. These are available in many fields of science.
9. On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin: This is a fundamental and landmark text for evolutionary thought. Agree or disagree with Darwin in any area you still need to know his work.
8. The Inflationary Universe by Alan Guth: Guth is the father of inflationary cosmology and this work is seminal in its field. Read this book, familiarize yourself with the concepts and consider the implications that inflationary cosmology may or may not have. This is the leading thought in cosmology, get to know it.
7. Darwinism, Design, and Public Education by John Angus Campbell and Stephen C. Meyer: Campbell and Meyer offer a rather detailed discourse on the state of evolution and design in academia and the public sphere. Though this isn’t primarily a scientific text it will help acclimate you to where the discussions are and where they are going.
6. Q is for Quantum by John Gribbin: Gribbin’s book is a systematic set of concepts, people, interpretations, and terms that is easy to follow and understand. Consider this the Oxford Companion on steroids.
5. More Than A Theory: Revealing a Testable Model for Creation by Hugh Ross: Ross is a Christian astrophysicist from the science think tank Reasons to Believe. What I appreciate about this book is that Ross puts the Christian doctrine of creation in empirical harms way. This is an excellent read and I highly recommend it.
4. Space, Time, and Spacetime by Lawrence Sklar: Sklar introduces the history and philosophy behind physics. Before diving deep into Einstein or Bohr try working through Sklar’s text as he guides your through the fundamentals of geometry, space, and other concepts crucial to having a solid understanding of physics.
3. Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design by Stephen Meyer: Meyer’s work is quite exhaustive in its attempt to consider the options for what is the source of the information required for life to exist. This isn’t the hardest work to read but it’s not a walk through the park either. Enjoy the several hundred pages as he discusses the role of information not only in biology but also as he briefly touches questions from cosmology.
2. A Matter of Days: Resolving a Creation Controversy and The Genesis Question: Scientific Advances and the Accuracy of Genesis by Hugh Ross: I had to use the two books in conjunction with one another. A Matter of Days provides the exegetical and hermeneutical aspect of creation and The Genesis Question correlates how the biblical text relates to the scientific questions. Though A Matter of Days isn’t a science book it does well with The Genesis Question being that when it comes to science, the doctrine of creation is most attacked doctrine. These two books will equip you biblically as well as scientifically.
1. The Nature of Nature: Examining the Role of Naturalism in Science by Bruce Gordon and William Dembski: Gordon and Dembski’s work is a series of papers and essays written by leading scholars in biology, cosmology, math, psychology, neuroscience, and philosophy. It discusses epistemic, metaphysical, and ontological aspects associated with science. This is essentially and philosophy of science text that allows you to develop theoretical approaches to interpreting the scientific facts. This is a must have.
