January 28, 2007
Inside the mind of an IDiot
Thoughts from a parallel universe, courtesy of American Chronicle:
Critics of Intelligent Design (ID), in their utter impotence to refute the theory’s basic logic that the existence of complex systems in nature implies the existence of an intelligent cause or designer, are doing their best to divert attention from the real issue by notoriously bringing up lame and demonstrably false arguments.
First of all, they allege that ID theorists failed to name the designer. The fundamental problem with this criticism is that intelligence in fact has been named as the designer—after all, the theory itself is called Intelligent Design. Thus the designer is intelligence. And because there is absolutely no demonstrable evidence that an intelligence above and beyond human intelligence exists, by default the credit for design in nature goes to human intelligence.
If ID critics want me to be even more specific, Christ identified himself as that intelligence which created the universe to make reproductions of himself in the form of human beings. In other words we find design in nature because Christ constitutes the seed of the universe, or the cosmic system’s input and output. As he disclosed it in Revelation 22:13, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”
Well, that pretty much clinches it for me. But wait, there’s more—much more:
Second, ID critics allege that the theory fails to provide testable claims. Again, this criticism is demonstrably false: ID is eminently testable, has been tested, and is being tested constantly. As a matter of fact, ID needs no testing at all. The fact that design is the basic quality of intelligence is so self-evident that anyone who doubts it has to be exquisitely ignorant or entirely delusional.
What needs to be demonstrated is not the fact that design is the basic quality of intelligence, but the abysmal absurdity that the formation of systems in nature—from atoms to the universe—is the basic quality of zero intelligence. Needless to say, the burden is on the critics of Intelligent Design to demonstrate that structure formation in the universe is the product of zero intelligence. Those who rabidly promote that nonsense are most qualified to do the demonstrations, having near-zero intelligence themselves.
In short, the claim that zero intelligence is the cause of structure formation in nature is pure speculation. Facts do not warrant it, and analogy does not support it. On top of that, the constant generation of structures by intelligence falsifies outright that lamebrained concept.
… Because the belief that zero intelligence caused the formation of the universe is patently irrational, we have no choice but to posit that the initial cause of the universe can be no lesser in qualities than what we find in the universe. Thus this logical inference from a highly complex effect to an initial cause no lesser in qualities than the effect itself points in the direction of an intelligent agent that we may call the parent seed, universal common ancestor, designer, or cosmic genotype of the phenotype universe.
And the “parent seed?”
Because we know that human intelligence in Christ’s person is the seed, creator or designer of the universe, we are in the position to predict with unparalleled confidence that Christ is the universal common ancestor of all things created. Also we predict that universal common descent has its source in Jesus Christ.
Overwhelming evidence for the relation of all creatures to Christ by universal common descent has been provided by paleontology, comparative anatomy, biogeography, embryology, biochemistry, molecular genetics, and other scientific disciplines.
Not to mention astrology and scatology.
Based on the knowledge that Christ created the universe to have children in his own image we also predict with great confidence that the cosmic system yields end-product or output in the form of human beings. This prediction is falsifiable, provided ID critics can present a being that exists beyond and above human beings. If they have such a superhuman being in their closet, we’d like to have it presented for our examination.
… Because we are the cosmic system’s output, we predict that exclusively human beings have the potential to provide information feedback to the cosmic system’s initial input for the purpose of self-regulation. Communication with the universe’s parent seed is not only possible, but such exchange of information is taking place constantly in the form of prayer. In other words from the systems point of view prayer qualifies as information feedback, where the cosmic system’s human output feeds information back to the cosmic system’s initial input, which feedback to our cosmic parent ensures homeostasis.
… In brief, we are about to realize that our universe does not have a big bang origin, but a seed origin, which initial and perpetual cosmic seed is Christ, the zero-point of creation. For reasons of his own he created the universe for the production of human beings in his own image, similarly as an acorn creates a mighty oak tree for the reproduction of itself.
For modern science to explain the generation of the universe without its parent seed is about as irrational as to explain the generation of a tree without its parent seed or genotype.
And irrationality is something the author, Kazmer Ujvarosy, is obviously familiar with.
Ujvarosy, for what it’s worth, is founder of Frontline Science, an “independent think tank” in San Francisco. Its home page is certainly impressive: Frontline is apparently “the first think tank to organize thinking around the unifying principle of science and religion, i.e., around the realization that human intelligence constitutes the seed of the universe, or the cosmic system's input and output.”
Must be one of those “belief tanks” Gary Trudeau mentioned today.
TrackBack URL for this entry: