One of the many smart observations in Tom Bethell's new book, Darwin's House of Cards, pertains to the curious relationship of Darwinism and Creationism -- and how that bears on efforts to suppress investigation of the theory of intelligent design. <\/p>\n
Darwinists seem to long for the good old days when their only opposition was from Biblical creationism. This is reflected in efforts to conflate ID with creationism, or to make the former a kind of forbidden science, off limits to discussion. As Bethell writes in his chapter on \"Intelligent Design and Information Theory\": <\/p>\n
The longing, the romance -- perhaps \"bromance\"? -- makes sense, since for all that separates them, Darwinism and creationism have in common that they are both inferences from prior doctrines (respectively, materialism, or a particular way of reading the Bible). ID is different. Says Bethell, \"Intelligent design is not a deduction from a philosophy but an inference from observed facts.\" <\/p>\n
This is what's so enraging to Darwinists, and it goes some way to explaining why they lash out -- holding their own tongue, and punishing ID advocates and open-minded researchers for failing to hold theirs. <\/p>\n
Bethell cites a telling lecture by University of Akron researcher Nita Sahai, \"The Origins of Life: From Geochemistry to Biochemistry.\" (See the video by clicking on the image at the top.) You actually see her catch herself, as she's helped out by a colleague, first saying that her lab work simulating OOL requires \"intelligent design\" -- no, no, no, make that \"careful selection.\" <\/p>\n
Mr. Bethell also tells the story of the publication of The Privileged Planet. Arguably more interesting than the book itself, he says, is what happened to its astronomer co-author at the Iowa State University, denounced by <\/p>\n
That monopoly was challenged on another campus, Baylor University, by mathematician William Dembski. <\/p>\n
Not even discussed. That is about as telling a statement as there could be. ID, unlike creationism, challenges Darwinian evolution on its own turf. That is not acceptable. Creationism for the Darwinist is a welcome foil. On the other hand, ID, which practices science where Darwinism is ultimately an exercise in philosophy, must be silenced. <\/p>\n
I'm on Twitter. Follow me @d_klinghoffer. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Follow this link:<\/p>\n
The Curious Romance of Darwinism and Creationism -- And Why Intelligent Design Must Be Silenced - Discovery Institute<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" One of the many smart observations in Tom Bethell's new book, Darwin's House of Cards, pertains to the curious relationship of Darwinism and Creationism -- and how that bears on efforts to suppress investigation of the theory of intelligent design. Darwinists seem to long for the good old days when their only opposition was from Biblical creationism. This is reflected in efforts to conflate ID with creationism, or to make the former a kind of forbidden science, off limits to discussion Continue reading