Comments on: Irreducible complexity

By: Spinoza

Spinoza — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:44:47 +0000

“I suspected you had a dog in this fight and weren’t some objective observer.”

Well I certainly do have a dog in the fight to protect academic scientific freedom from religious bullies and hypocrites. I’m pretty sure everybody here does! But perhaps not in the way you think.

Report comment to moderator

By: Spinoza

Spinoza — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:42:33 +0000

So that’s what this is all about.

No it’s not. It’s about your flawed use of the concept of “peer review.”

Report comment to moderator

By: Roger

Roger — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 19:57:41 +0000

Spinoza — Think about this – the churches of America are under peer review. I never experienced such social coercion and pressure to conform as when I was in an fundamentalist church! Not ANYWHERE!

Roger — So that’s what this is all about. I suspected you had a dog in this fight and weren’t some objective observer.

Report comment to moderator

By: Spinoza

Spinoza — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:05:28 +0000

Nice NY Times article today on Francisco Ayala:

Roving Defender of Evolution, and of Room for God

Excerpt:

He said he was saddened when he saw the embrace of evolution identified with, as he put it, “explicit atheism,” as in the books of the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins or other writers on science and faith.

Neither the existence nor nonexistence of God is susceptible to scientific proof, Dr. Ayala said, and equating science with the abandonment of religion “fits the prejudices” of advocates of intelligent design and other creationist ideas.

“Science and religion concern nonoverlapping realms of knowledge,” he writes in the new book. “It is only when assertions are made beyond their legitimate boundaries that evolutionary theory and religious belief appear to be antithetical.”

It is important that Dr. Ayala “is not a religion-basher,” Dr. Scott said, “because creationists always showcase the religion-bashers in science as if they speak for all scientists. They clearly do not speak for Francisco and many others.”
Report comment to moderator

By: Spinoza

Spinoza — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 17:04:24 +0000

#123 p.s. – by “peer review” I mean Roger’s usage of conflating it with “peer pressure.” I don’t really believe these are the same thing!

Report comment to moderator

By: Spinoza

Spinoza — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:11:36 +0000

Think about this – the churches of America are under peer review. I never experienced such social coercion and pressure to conform as when I was in an fundamentalist church! Not ANYWHERE!

Report comment to moderator

By: Roger

Roger — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 14:44:35 +0000

Spinoza — Fortunately for me, I have no experience with it whatsoever and can continue to practice “good science” as defined by good methodology applied to interesting and soluble questions and as identified by peer-review without the imposed will of your politico-technocratic bogeyman.

Roger — Sadly, you are blind and don’t know it. And I can tell you have no idea what I’m talking about. All you can do is repeat the party line. Think about this, the gangs of America are under peer-review.

Report comment to moderator

By: cslewislover

cslewislover — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:33:19 +0000

“‘Come now, let us reason together,’ says the Lord” (Isaiah 1:18). I think a lot of pastors take this to heart, but others speak in a very light-weight way. In any case, a full understaning of God himself is beyond our reasoning abilities, so I don’t think you should take it lightly. That God wants to save us, instead of destroying us for all of our sins, I believe is beyond all reason.

Report comment to moderator

By: Spinoza

Spinoza — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 23:24:35 +0000

When it comes to religious leaders, it’s more than ethics that I’m thinking about. It’s deeper than that, and I don’t think I could explain it. Part of it is that you can see that “they’re nice beyond all reason.”

Well I can agree to the “beyond all reason” part, but they’re typically only “nice” if you’re willing to follow them “beyond reason”!

Report comment to moderator

By: cslewislover

cslewislover — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 22:36:10 +0000

RE #117. When it comes to religious leaders, it’s more than ethics that I’m thinking about. It’s deeper than that, and I don’t think I could explain it. Part of it is that you can see that “they’re nice beyond all reason.”

Stein et al. used that John Lennon song, where he sings about how everything would be peaceful if there were no religion. I’m beginning to think that he should’ve sang instead about science. When I die I’d much rather be able to say that I helped out some people here, not that I was right about some scientific theories or facts (which may change in a hundred or so years).

Anyway, Meyers has a degree from Cambridge – nothing to sneeze at – in the Philosophy of Science. So for him to be philosphical in looking at data seems very reasonable.

Otherwise, since I have other things to do with my life (getting to the bottom of this specific conversation would take the work of acquiring a Ph.D all in itself), I’m going to say: “Oi. Nevermind.” May God bless your inquiries.

Report comment to moderator