Home » Intelligent Design » Evidence-Free Science

Evidence-Free Science

Yes, it tastes like real science, but it has zero calories and cannot sustain life.

[From a colleague:] Why are scientists admitting that current origin of life chemistry is vexing or even dead? Why else does it need “new life breathed into it”?

“One of the most vexing questions facing biologists is how life on Earth first emerged. Now, research on a methane-producing microbe has led to a novel theory that could breathe new life into the field and help two opposing theories find common ground.”

Quoted here: http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2006/519/2

What are the other vexing questions facing biologists that we are led to believe have already been solved? How about the origin of the information in the first cell? How about the origin of molecular machines? What about Haldane’s dilemma?

For an up-to-date summary of the “evidence free” science behind the belief that life arose spontaneously, check out the following:

http://www.bio.miami.edu/tom/bil160/bil160goods/01_prokaryotes.html

You need to do better than fairy tales to call it science.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

5 Responses to Evidence-Free Science

  1. “You need to do better than fairy tales to call it science.”

    Where have you been for the last 150 years? ;)

  2. Ahhhh… but While the Emporer is STILL king he can procliam even thin air to be royal garments and his loyal yes-men gape in awe at the exquisit embriodery intricately woven by the state-appointed tailors!

  3. Jumping to the http://www.bio.miami.edu link:

    Fortuitous maybe, but serendipitous?? I thought that referred more to ‘discovery’, rather than ‘formation’ (abiogenesis), but in the fantasy world of ‘what if’, anything is possible. They even throw in Panspermia, with the caveat that even if true, life still had to form somewhere, posing the same tough questions.

    By now, we can admit to the chance occurrence of some amino acids (Miller-Urey), but I have yet to see a cook book formulary explaining how more complex proteins form, let alone how the coding and sequencing of those proteins progress. Can you say not just complexity, but specified complexity.

    Although the provided treatise from University of Miami biology pages touches on the subject, I like talk.origins’ attempt better, even though it likewise fails to make the case, IMO.
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faq.....ation.html

    Yes, from what I see, “… it does taste like science, but has zero calories and cannot sustain life.”

  4. Hmmmmmmmmmm… “Evidence-free science”. Sounds like the title of a new adition to the Darwinalia® product line.

    Now you can have the famous, 150 years old game, at your home!

    Indicated for children between 2-7 years of age, “Evidence-free science – the board game” provides children with BILLIONS AND BILLIONS (add a picture of Sagan with a funny hat) of hours of fun as they try to solve the greatest scientific difficulties within the materialistic paradigm.

    In this game you are not allowed to use any kind of evidence – just an assumption. Each player starts with a different skill, ranging from the classic 5 D’s of Darwinism (Duck, Dodge, Dip, Deny and Dodge) to the most exquisite forms of logical fallacies.

    Pave your way out of College into the field of evolutionary psychology, explain away the Cambrian “Explosion” (quotation marks mandatory) or give “mother nature” a hand killing 90% of the entire population. But beware! The fundies are after you (add a picture of Berlinski with the Discovery Institute logo behind him) trying to institute a theocracy and destroy science, economy, freedom and apple pies! Use your RUN TO THE HILLS card and avoid their attacks (and scholarship) at all costs.

    Endorsements:

    Dawkins: “The “G” word? Gaaaaaaaah!! I HATE IT! HATE IT! HATE IT! Oh… You mean “G”ame uhn? I, I like it.”

    Dennet: “It took hold of my mind like a meme!”

    Haeckel: “It’s the greatest find since the Bathybius haeckelii! And I didn’t have to draw this one…”

  5. It never ceases to amaze me how many blogs write long, vitriolic attacks on Dembski whenever he posts anything. Just goes to show you, one side of this debate is running out of ideas of their own…

Leave a Reply