Tuesday, July 20, 2010

A Scientific Hypothesis: Great News on the ID Front-lines!

The other day I asked, "can positing the existence of a Creator be a legitimate scientific hypothesis?"

"The presence of a creative deity in the universe is clearly a scientific hypothesis. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more momentous hypothesis in all of science." -- Richard Dawkins.

Some guy named Dawkins thinks so. Now, apparently, so does  the International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics.

"A peer-reviewed paper, "Information and Entropy -- Top-Down or Bottom-Up Development in Living Systems?," by University of Leeds professor Andy McIntosh in the International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics expressly endorses intelligent design (ID) via an exploration of a key question in ID thinking:
The ultimate question in origins must be: Can information increase in a purely materialistic or naturalistic way? It is not satisfactory to simply assume that information has to have arisen in this way. The alternative of original design must be allowed and all options examined carefully."  Source: EN&V.

Ha! Obviously not a real science journal!  (Oh, wait -- it is).

Ha, ha! Obviously not peer-reviewed. (Oh, wait -- it was).

Now, the only question is how long it will be before the darwinian scientific community circles the wagons and shames/shuns this journal?


Anonymous said...

A credible scientist?

Not really. The author, Andy McIntosh, is notorious Young Earth Creationist crank.

A credible scientific journal?

Not even close. The International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics is a fringe publication of the featherweight Wessex Institute of Technology. Oh, and guess what? McIntosh is on their Editorial Board. One of its editors is Stuart Burgess, another notorious YEC.

This paper and this journal have about as much credibility as the Hitler Diaries.

RkBall said...

xn-etc. Thanks for weighing in.

Wik shows that A.M. has the following degrees/credentials: BSc, PhD, DSc, FIMA, CMath, FInstE, CEng, FInstP, MIGEM, FRAeS.

Should we call him Dr. Crank?!

PS -- weren't the Hitler Diaries originally attested to by credible experts?

Anonymous said...

It also shows that he's a chemical engineer, a field with ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Information Theory, Abiogenesis or Evolutionary Biology.

Prof Crank is no more qualified to opine on these subjects than your plumber.

PS: who cares? Dissecting my simile clearly demonstrates that you're simply attempting to sidestep the issue.

RkBall said...

Nah, I'm just bummed out by your comments.

"... nothing intellectually compelling or challenging.. bald assertions coupled to superstition... woefully pathetic"