2005

Mark Perakh, "Beyond suboptimality. Why irreducible complexity does not imply intelligent design" (2005)

Talk Reason; http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Suboptimal.cfm ----------------- Michael Behe's concept of the irreducible complexity (IC) of molecular assemblies in biological cells has been touted by intelligent design (ID) advocates as allegedly strong evidence for ID. In fact, a concept identical in all but name with Behe's IC has been around for a long time before Behe. Professional biologists have overwhelmingly rejected Behe's notion as contrary to the evidence, showing that irreducibly complex molecular systems could have evolved via "Darwinian" evolutionary path with a high likelihood. In this essay Mark Perakh approaches the problem from an angle different from that utilized by biologists. He argues that the notion according to which IC implies ID is contrary to logic. IC systems, by definition, are unreliable, so if they are designed, this points to an inept designer. Perakh further argues that in this case we deal not just with the problem of suboptimal design but with a case where the putative designer delberately designed systems in a way making them easily vulnerable to accidental damage. Perakh concludes that if biological systems are indeed IC this more reasonably can be construed as an argument against inteligent design.

William A. Dembski, "Searching Large Spaces: Displacement and the No Free Lunch Regress" (2005)

Abstract --- Searching for small targets in large spaces is a common problem in the sciences. Because blind search is inadequate for such searches, it needs to be supplemented with additional information, thereby transforming a blind search into an assisted search. This additional information can be quantified and indicates that assisted searches themselves result from searching higher-level search spaces–by conducting, as it were, a search for a search. Thus, the original search gets displaced to a higher-level search. The key result in this paper is a displacement theorem, which shows that successfully resolving such a higher-level search is exponentially more difficult than successfully resolving the original search. Leading up to this result, a measure-theoretic version of the No Free Lunch theorems is formulated and proven. The paper shows that stochastic mechanisms, though able to explain the success of assisted searches in locating targets, cannot, in turn, explain the source of assisted searches. --- http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.03.Searching_Large_Spaces.pdf

Mark Perakh, "Dembski "displaces Darwinism" mathematically -- or does he?" (2005)

Mark Perakh briefly reviews a recent article by William Dembski (http://www.designinference.com/documents/2005.03.Searching_Large_Spaces.pdf) and shows that, contrary to Dembski's claims, it cannot serve as part of the mathematical foundation of intelligent design. Among several serious faults of Demsbki's paper is his view of biological evolution as a search for a small target in a large search space. In fact, biological evolution is not searching for a target. Probabilities calculated by Dembski, for example, for "finding" a specific protein in the space of all possible proteins of a given length are irrelevant because evolution is not "searching" for a predetermined specific protein. Likewise, Dembski's "displacement problem" (which in his new article is in fact not identical to the problem of the same name as rendered by Dembski in his earlier publications) is equally irrelevant for evolution, since the latter conducts no target-oriented searches. --- http://www.talkreason.org/articles/newmath.cfm

Geoff Brumfiel, "Intelligent design: Who has designs on your students' minds?" (2005)

"Nature" 28 April 2005, vol. 434, s. 1062-1065; http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v434/n7037/full/4341062a.html --- Abstract --- The intelligent-design movement is a small but growing force on US university campuses. For some it bridges the gap between science and faith, for others it goes beyond the pale. Geoff Brumfiel meets the movement's vanguard.

Wesley R. Elsberry, "A Response to Berlinski" (2005)

"Talk Origins" http://www.talkreason.org/articles/dumbski.cfm --- In this article Dr. Elsberry addresses the recent op-ed piece by David Berlinski in a California newspaper. In that paper Berlinski, among other things, falsely accused Talk Reason of deliberately misspelling William Dembski's surname in a derogatory manner and of allegedly viewing such a misspelling as "clever beyond measure." In fact, Talk Reason has never resorted to the mentioned misspelling of Dembski's name and likewise never expressed any approval of such a misspelling as being "clever beyond measure," or in any other way. Berlinski's groundless accusations amounted to slander. In subsequent messages to Talk Reason (posted under this essay), as well as in his comments posted to the Panda's Thumb weblog, Berlinski not only did not apologize for his groundless accusations but tried to evade the question in point by using irrelevant semantic acrobatics obviously aimed at obfuscating the matter under discussion. Readers should draw their own conclusions regarding Berlinski's intellectual integrity. Comment: While originally David Berlinski asked not to post his letters (see discussion), in a subsequent letter he gave his consent to make these letters public. --- Posted April 11, 2005

Michael McGough, "Bad Science, Bad Theology" (2005)

eSkeptic: the email newsletter of the Skeptics Society, Friday, August 26th, 2005. Opinion Editorial on intelligent design by Michael McGough, originally published in the "Los Angeles Times", August 15th, 2005.

Guillermo Gonzalez, "Habitable Zones in the Universe" (2005) pdf

Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres --- Abstract --- Habitability varies dramatically with location and time in the universe. This was recognized centuries ago, but it was only in the last few decades that astronomers began to systematize the study of habitability. The introduction of the concept of the habitable zone was key to progress in this area. The habitable zone concept was first applied to the space around a star, now called the Circumstellar Habitable Zone. Recently, other, vastly broader, habitable zones have been proposed. We review the historical development of the concept of habitable zones and the present state of the research. We also suggest ways to make progress on each of the habitable zones and to unify them into a single concept encompassing the entire universe. http://204.121.6.57/abs/astro-ph/0503298

Geoff Feiss, "From the President - Re: Intelligent Design Article"

http://www.nagt.org/pipermail/nagtnews/2005-October/000017.html --- Jest to reakcja na artykuł Marcus Ross, "Who Believes What? Clearing up Confusion over Intelligent Design and Young-Earth Creationism", "Journal of Geoscience Education", May 2005, vol. 53, no. 3, p. 319-323, http://creationism.org.pl/groups/ptkrmember/inteligentny-projekt/ross%20who%20believes%20what.pdf

Allan Glenn, "Organisms that Look Designed" (2005)

The author of this post, Allan Glenn, passed away on November 4, 2005 from cystic fibrosis, at the age of 20. A surgery that could possibly have saved his life would have cost about $400,000. His insurance refused to cover such a surgery. He was bright and witty. We all suffered a loss on November 4. --------------------------------------------(The following summary was written by Allan himself.) A tongue-in-cheek spoof (and, I've been told, devastating reductio ad absurdum) of the "irreducible complexity" arguments put forth by proponents of Intelligent Design "theory." This article describes some of the most grotesque lifeforms known to man and makes a case for a sociopathic god worthy of an H.P. Lovecraft novel. "Equal Time" proponents, be careful what you wish for--or the baby-killing liberals might just have this taught in schools. Now with dozens more evolution-wrecking lifeforms, lots of colorful pictures and myriad inside jokes! Note: This article contains mature subject matter like utterly horrendous parasites and graphic illustrations of disease-ridden walking corpses; it is NOT for the squeamish. published: Nov 06, 2005 --- http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Organisms.cfm

Sheldon Danielson, "Divine Farce: A Scientific / Philosophic Romp Through Intelligent Design" (2005)

"Talk Reason" published: Nov 07, 2005; http://www.talkreason.org/articles/IntelligentDesign.cfm --- Abstract --- The history of science can be regarded as the gradual process of removing the supernatural from our understanding of natural events and replacing it with concepts of material causality, matter and energy. In so doing, science has often found itself in conflict with religious dogma committed to a contrary view of the natural order. In the past such conflicts have usually taken the form of open contests between competing magisteria: theological on the one hand, empirical and rational on the other. Intelligent Design presents science with a qualitatively new kind of challenge: theology masquerading as science – a modern Trojan Horse. In responding to this subterfuge, this paper reviews the history and philosophy of science, neo-Darwinian evolution theory, and examines in detail some of ID’s specific claims.

Seth Shostak, "SETI and Intelligent Design" (2005)

http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_intelligentdesign_051201.html --- Abstract --- Intelligent Design (ID) proponents often refer to the SETI project as allegedly using a methodology analogous to their search for signs of Intelligence in the universe in general and in the biosphere in particular. They point out that the SETI project has been enjoying support from the scientific community (which is true) and therefore ID must be construed as legitimate as well. In particular, William Dembski has been persistently using such an argument in his ceaseless attempts to confer legitimacy upon his discourse aimed at "proving" that ID is a real scientific theory deserving serious consideration. On this site several contributors (Elsberry, Edis, Perakh, Shallit, and others) have debunked Dembski's numerous publications, including his pseudo-mathematics, and including his use of the SETI example. However, until now the SETI institute's staff has been staying away from the discussion of the alleged similarity of their methodology to ID's approach. In this essay, Seth Shostak of the SETI institute starts from the standpoint of the legitimate SETI approach and shows the lack of substantiation in ID advocates' comparison of their notions to the actual contents of the SETI project. In fact, SETI methodology has nothing in common with the ID advocates' fallacious approach and in a certain sense is contrary to it.

Matthew J. Brayer, Barbara Forrest, Steven G. Gey, "Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Designe Creationism and the Constitution" (2005)

"Washington University Law Quarterly" 2005, vol. 83, no. 1, s. 1-149; http://law.wustl.edu/WULQ/83-1/p%201%20Brauer%20Forrest%20Gey%20book%20pages.pdf --- Abstract --- On several occasions during the last eighty years, states have attempted to either prohibit the teaching of evolution in public school science classes or counter the teaching of evolution with mandatory references to the religious doctrine of creationism. The Supreme Court struck down examples of the first two generations of these statutes, holding that they violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. A third generation of creationist legislation is now being proposed. Under this new generation of creationism legislation, science teachers would present so-called “intelligent design” theory as an alternative to evolution. Intelligent design theory asserts that a supernatural intelligence intervened in the natural world to dictate the nature and ordering of all biological species, which do not evolve from lower-to higher-order beings. This article considers whether these intelligent design creationism proposals can survive constitutional scrutiny. The authors analyze the religious, philosophical, and scientific details of intelligent design theory, and assess these details in light of the constitutional doctrine developed by the Court in its previous creationism decisions. The Article discusses several factors that pose problems for intelligent design theory, including the absence of objective scientific support for intelligent design, evidence of strong links between intelligent design and religious doctrine, the use of intelligent design to limit the dissemination of scientific theories that are perceived as contradicting religious teachings, and the fact that the irreducible core of intelligent design theory is what the Court has called the “manifestly religious” concept of a God or Supreme Being. Based on these details, the authors conclude that intelligent design theory cannot survive scrutiny under the constitutional framework used by the Court to invalidate earlier creationism mandates.