This is Science? But some folks claim ID isn’t? Why?
|October 20, 2009||Posted by Clive Hayden under Intelligent Design, Science|
So let’s take a look around and see what passes for science today. One article comes to mind as an example of the peculiar, and it’s from The New York Times. This article explains how some scientists, probably considered mainstream, have posited that tiny particles are abhorred by nature, so nature, knowing that physicists will discover these tiny particles in the future, sabotages the equipment the that the physicists intend on using.
More than a year after an explosion of sparks, soot and frigid helium shut it down, the world’s biggest and most expensive physics experiment, known as the Large Hadron Collider, is poised to start up again…
I’m talking about the notion that the troubled collider is being sabotaged by its own future. A pair of otherwise distinguished physicists have suggested that the hypothesized Higgs boson, which physicists hope to produce with the collider, might be so abhorrent to nature that its creation would ripple backward through time and stop the collider before it could make one, like a time traveler who goes back in time to kill his grandfather. Holger Bech Nielsen, of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, and Masao Ninomiya of the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics in Kyoto, Japan, put this idea forward in a series of papers with titles like “Test of Effect From Future in Large Hadron Collider: a Proposal” and “Search for Future Influence From LHC,” posted on the physics Web site arXiv.org in the last year and a half.
And some folks still consider the proposition of straightforward intelligent design in nature to be beyond science? I mean, we know that intelligent agents design things, do we know that particles are abhorred by clairvoyant nature and that she intentionally sabotages our equipment?
Now, I’m all for strange theories, this universe is a strange place, but let’s be consistent in what we deem scientific.