Design Detective: Episode 1

Proponents of Intelligent Design often refuse to answer questions about the identity of the designer. They claim that the question of whether or not a complex structure was designed is separate from the question of who the designer is. But in order to determine the causal adequacy of the design hypothesis, the mechanism by which the designer operates must be investigated. As this short video attempts to demonstrate, to simply claim that a cause was "intelligent" and walk away is not responsible science.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Intelligent Design
• irreducible complexity
• gordon j. glover
• creation
• evolution
• darwin
• darwinism
• design detective
• forensic science
• discovery institute

[Daytimeofnight]

Haha, loved the part about PhDs in mathematics.

Of course, even this analogy gives the ID proponents too much credit. It actually would be of some use to have a device that could distinguish between accidental death and homicide. BUT only because we know that homicides do occur. In science, every time we've thought something was the result of the intervention of an intelligent agent, we later discovered that natural causes were the real culprit. We've yet to have a single confirmed "homicide"

[glovergj]

aha! stay tuned for Episode 2!

[JT898]

Nice work Gordon. Are you focusing all your videos on responses to ID now or will you be discussing other topics in the future too?

[glovergj]

I've got 4 of these, then who knows what's next?

[scorpionsSon]

/watch?v=YResfXTXd1c



[boymowgli]

It is unfortunate that this analogy uses "taking and destroying" to teach a lesson on "giving and creating." Otherwise, it succeeds in pointing out that studying some sort of designer while ignoring everything about Him is ignorant and destructive.

[arsjth]

glovergj

Your video is an appeal to popular culture and uses strawman arguments not made by intelligent designers or creationists and your attempt to discredit them reveals your true intent.

where is your analysis of the true arguments made by the ID scientists?

i say you are a phony

probably a theistic evolutionist or as dawkins calls them 'useful idiots'

if u r a christian dawkins says that you are deluded. The bible is nonsense & that jesus didnt exist.

[Daytimeofnight]

@NeoPsiTom: I'm open to the possibility that God could have intervened, but I don't see any scientific need to invoke divine intervention nor do I think it likely that science will be able to find evidence of such intervention if it did occur.

Behe seems to envision a very strange God who is, on the one hand, capable of creating the vast wonders of the universe through natural laws and naturalistic processes, yet needs to pop in every once in a while to give flagella to bubonic plague bacteria

[NeoPsiTom]

@Daytimeofnight lol Hi Daytime, The first person that comes to mind is Michael Behe, who fully accepts the reality of common descent. But, he believes God intervened in mutational events (God of the gaps). =) Tom PS By the way I subscribe to purely naturalistic evolution.

[jimmo42]

Great Job, Gordon! Keep up the good work!

[CousinoMacul]

Cute! (I loved the little dig at Dembski.)