Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Proving Intelligent Design Is A Retreat Back to the Dark Ages; Concluding Intelligent Design Is Good Science

Just so everyone is on the same page:  For those of you who believe that evolution is easily disproved by looking at the amazing order, synergistic form with function, and cooperating system apparent in the universe; I say, "nuh-uh"; or, less succinctly, "Very complex systems can come into being by random processes; given a typing pool of monkeys randomly banging on typewriters, they will eventually produce the entire works of William Shakespeare."  For those of you who believe that belief in a supernatural creator is entirely a matter of blind faith and outside the pale of logical investigation; I say, "nuh-uh"; or, less succinctly, "Given the available data (both historical and physical measurements) and current understanding, the most rational conclusion is that the universe is the beautiful production of an intelligent and wise Creator, tailor made to accomplish His purposes.  Now that everyone is mad at me and thinks I am on the "the other side", I can say what I want without consideration that I am just pandering to my fans.

Here's a couple of problems with disproving evolution because of the design we see in the universe.  First of all, seeing a design is hopelessly subjective.  That is, after all, what the Rorschach test is all about.  Asking someone to describe the design they see in even an amorphous blob of ink tells you more about them than any supposed design (which is, but construction, nonexistent).  In fact, the evolutionists will tell you precisely that: we can learn a lot about ancient cultures by studying the mythology they invented to cope with the complexity of their environment.

But there is a deeper problem.  Let's make a coin flipping experiment: we'll flip a single fair coin once.  Probability of heads: 0.5.  Now will flip it twice: probably of two heads in a row: 0.25.  Four times: probability of three heads: 0.0625, but probability of two heads and two tails: 0.375.  Therefore, you are more likely to flip two heads and two tails that four tails.  However, that is not because a mixture is more likely than all the same, but because we didn't care when the heads and tails showed up. The probability of getting heads-tails-heads-tails in that order, on the other hand, is also only 0.0625; the same as tossing all heads.  So if we repeat our experiment thousands of time, approximately 1/16 of those trials will be all heads.  Will it be the first time we do our experiment or the 10,000th time?  No way to predict; all equally likely.  If you have as many times to run the experiment as you like, then you'll generate all sorts of interesting patterns.  All randomly generated, despite the complexity.

Conclusion: evidence of design is highly subjective, and even complex designs can come about by a random process running for a long time.  No matter how complex, it is never proof of intelligent design.

What about the other way?  The scientific method is to collect data and then (and only then) propose a model to explain the data.  Without going into details, I assert (without proof for now) that you are left with two most likely explanations: random process (as above), or the Torah description of creation.  Moreover, the Torah description is clearly a better explanation.  Note that I am not saying, "Well, I can't explain this or that, so I guess there is a creator."  I am saying that explanation that best covers the data and that requires the fewest leaps of faith is to conclude that HaShem created the world.

That's if you are honest.  If you are not honest, but dogmatically and illogically declare that there can't be a creator, then you are stuck with evolution.  That leaves you a dogmatic/religious atheist with no future and no present.  Sad, really.


Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Battling the Evil Inclination on all Fronts

Yom Kippur.  When I was growing up, there were three annual events that marked the Jewish calendar: eating matzos on Passover, lighting candles on Chanuka, and  fasting on Yom Kippur.  Major news organizations around the world report on the "surreal" and "eerie" quiet of the streets in even the most secular neighborhoods of Israel.  Yom Kippur.

As you know, I am observant of Jewish law.  Some have even called me "ultra orthodox" (not in a kind way).  Given that, I have a question.  How likely do you think that I would be tempted to eat on Yom Kippur, that most holy day of the year?  Let's make the scale zero to ten, where zero is "as likely as driving through McDonald's on Shabbos and ordering a Big Mac with extra cheese." and ten is "as likely as breathing regularly".  Take your time.  If you answered "zero"; thank you, but -- sadly and penitently -- no.  The answer is more like nine; I'd like to say lower, but i…

Thought for the Day: Sometimes a Food Loses Its Identity When It Loses Its Bracha; Sometimes It Doesn't

Let's start with a question: Why are We Allowed to Drink Coffee and Whiskey Made by Non-Jews?  Before you ask,"Why would I think that I shouldn't be able to drink whiskey and coffee made by non-Jews?", I'll tell you. Simple, we all know that Chazal made a decree -- known as בישול עכו''ם/bishul akim -- that particular foods cooked by non-Jews are forbidden.  There are basically two criteria that determines if a dish falls into this category:
Is not consumed raw.Fit for a royal banquet. Cooked carrots, therefore, are not a problem since they can be eaten raw (I actually prefer them that way).  Baked beans are find because the are not prestigious enough.  (For great synopsis of the laws, see the article on the Star-K site, FOOD FIT FOR A KING, by Rabbi Moshe Heinemann, shlita.)  There are lots of cool questions and details (baked potatoes are prestigious, does that make even potato chips and issue?) which are for another time.  Clearly, though, both coffee an…

Thought for the Day: Coming Into This World for Torah, Avodah, and Acts of Loving Kindness

This TftD is so self-serving that I should be embarrassed.  But I am not... talking about grandchildren is always off budget.  I have, bli ayin hara, a beautiful new grandson; born at 6:11 PM CDT last Friday night.  The secular (aka -- by me, anyway -- slave) date is October 20, 2017 CE.  The Hebrew (aka Real) date is certainly Rosh Chodesh חשון/Cheshvan and certainly in the year 5778 since Creation.  The date, you ask... good question!

Sundown on Friday night was 6:01 PM CDT, which means he was born either at the end of the last day of תשרי or the beginning of the first day of Cheshvan; a period know as בין השמשות/twilight.  What's the big deal, you ask... I am so glad you asked.  We all deal quite handily with בין השמשות every week and every holiday; we're just stringent.  We start Shabbos and the first day of Yom Tov before בין השמשות; that is, before sundown.  Likewise, we end Shabbos and the first day of Yom Tov after בין השמשות; some 42, 50, 60, or 72 minutes after sundo…