Carl Sagan on The Demon Haunted World

Liberty News TV--Episode 14 - Twilight in America

The Best of Darwin's Dagger: Bad Science, Bad Religion

I was watching Michael Behe on the Colbert Report the other day, preaching to the choir as it were (Colbert’s fake news, conservative pundit alter ego) about how the Theory of Intelligent Design modifies our understanding of biological evolution in the same way Einstein’s Theory of Relativity modified our understanding of gravity. Colbert commented that Behe was Darwin’s Einstein (serving the same role that Einstein filled for Newton) which is, of course, the funniest thing I’ve heard all year.

Behe makes one good point about science; it’s not carved in stone. Newton’s understanding of gravitation was brilliant, but basic, compared to the nuances that Einstein brought to the topic. And that’s what scientists are always doing, finding new data, testing theories, re-imagining the way we look at the universe and then rigorously measuring material reality to see if such re-imaginations measure up. What Einstein brought to the gravity table was a whole new way of imagining what it was, the warping of space-time by mass. It was unconventional and counterintuitive to those raised on the Newtonian Theory of Gravity, but it explained variations in planetary orbits that Newton’s theory could not, and ultimately has proven to be quite a reliable theory for space agencies sending rovers to Mars and probes to Saturn.

The problem with Behe and the Intelligent Design cohort is that they have not done anything remotely similar to what Einstein did. Einstein had a brilliant insight into the structure and nature of the universe. ID supporters merely want to justify their beliefs by giving them scientific credibility. They look for gaps in the fossil record or what they call Irreducible Complexity in the natural world and rather than being genuine scientists and trying to figure out what fits in those gaps or explains that complexity decide to fill those holes with and unknown and undefined intelligence. Calling that good science is like calling the insertion of “there be dragons here” good mapmaking. It is in fact the worst kind of science imaginable, because it is not based on anything real or measurable but solely on wishful thinking.

And when you think about it, for Christianity, it’s not good religion either. How can a religion based on the inherit perfection of the divine creator explain the inherit imperfections in creation? If the designer is acting with perfect knowledge and intention, how is it possible for creation to go so horribly wrong? And if that omniscient, omnipotent being did ‘design’ all of this, isn’t he alone responsible for its failures? The natural unfolding of the universe after the big bang, the processes of star birth and death that created heavier elements, the accretion of stardust into planets, the start of life on one of those planets and the evolution of that life by natural selection into human beings lets God off of the incompetent creator hook. He started the process, a bunch of stuff happened, humanity emerged, and although he never intentionally designed it, being the omniscient being that he was, he could see it coming. So he set up the redemption process in order to redeem these beings that arose imperfectly out of an imperfect process. That’ll never be good science, until you can dissect God, but Christianity actually makes more sense if there is no intelligent design, because intelligence and design just makes the whole mess God’s fault.

Originally posted on August 6, 2007

Enemies of the Republic

America is a Christian nation. This statement is certainly true when you consider the numbers; a vast majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians. But in a democratic republic, simple numerical superiority only counts for so much. The founders of this nation understood that. It’s why they attached all those amendments to the Constitution, to ensure that each individual’s liberty was protected against the whims of the majority. The Freedom of Religion and the Freedom from Religion are equal parts of the same liberty, and are as firmly enshrined in the democratic heritage of our nation as the right to vote and the Freedom of Expression.

Some theists have deluded notions about the nature of our republic and the character of the men who founded it. Many of those men probably identified themselves as Christians, but they understood that the form of government they were trying to create was incompatible with religious entanglements. There could be no true freedom in the system if religious dogma was allowed to influence the governing of the nation. Religion, by its nature is about absolutes, absolutes that seek to restrict the freedom of conscience that we all posses and replace it with the conscience of a priesthood, a hierarchy or some misguided piece of bronze age literature. If the United States was to be a nation composed of people with the freedom of conscience, or of any freedom at all, then religion had to be an individual choice of private citizens.

The danger to the republic from religious extremism isn’t always as apparent as it was on September 11, 2001. The most insidious threat does not come from those who openly attack our infrastructure and citizens with acts of horrific violence, but from those self-appointed and self-righteous defenders of the nation, who seek to annihilate the foundations of our liberty by undermining the constitutional separation of church and state. It is easier to bury the dead and rebuild the towers in the wake of religious terrorism than it will be to regain the freedoms lost to home grown theocrats who would impose a Taliban like regime in the United States. They are the true enemies of our republic.

Blog Against Theocracy - April 10 - 12, 2009

Bacterial Communication