Intelligent Design Must Be Taken Seriously

David Gelernter, once called by the New York Times a “rock star,” is a renowned writer and a Yale University computer science professor has recently denounced Darwin’s theory of evolution.

In an essay reviewing Stephen Meyer’s book, Darwin’s Doubt, the Professor argues that Darwinian evolution has too many holes and flaws for him to continue to accept its theory.

“Darwin’s theory predicts that new life forms evolve gradually from old ones in a constantly branching, spreading tree of life,” the professor wrote in a paper titled, “Giving Up Darwin.” “Those brave new Cambrian creatures must therefore have had Precambrian predecessors, similar but not quite as fancy and sophisticated. They could not have all blown out suddenly, like a bunch of geysers.”

Gelernter added that “each must have had a closely related predecessor, which must have had its own predecessors.” Furthermore, he explained that there are not enough fossils to back up the theory.

To be fair Gelernter does not personally believe the theory of Intelligent Design, yet acknowledged that it is an “absolutely serious argument,” noting that it is the “first, and obviously most intuitive theory that comes to mind.”

Speaking at a conference in June, Gelernter was candid in admitting that academics who question Darwinism are unfairly attacked by their colleagues.

“I have to distinguish between the way I’ve been treated personally, which has been a very courteous and collegial way by my colleagues at Yale, they’re nice guys and I like them, they’re my friends,” he said in a discussion hosted by the Hoover Institute.

“On the other hand, when I look at their intellectual behavior, what they publish, and, much more important, what they tell their students, Darwinism has indeed passed beyond a scientific argument. As far as they are concerned, take your life in you hands to challenge it intellectually. They will destroy you if you challenge it.”

Most in the academic field show “nothing approaching free speech on this topic,” Gelernter warned. The “bitter, fundamental, angry, outraged rejection” of intelligent design “comes nowhere near scientific or intellectual discussion.” Indeed, in rejecting Darwinism, “I am attacking their religion.”

As a new school year begins, many of our young people will be exposed to various evolutionary theories both in High School and at state universities. Some will have to sit in classes where God is mocked and their faith is attacked. They will be made to feel intellectually inferior for their religious beliefs. Ironically, evolution will be taught as fact with a religious fervor. And it will be implied, if not stated that all serious scientists believe in evolution. That is a lie.

In a 2017 Huffington Post article, “12 Famous Scientists on the Possibility of God,” writer Carol Kuruvilla reports a survey that says 51% of scientists believe in God or some form of a Higher Power.

Francis Collins, a Geneticist, who holds a Ph.D. from Yale was appointed by President Barack Obama to head the National Institutes of Health and was retained in that position by President Trump. Collins is highly respected in his field and has written a number of books on science, medicine, and religion, including the New York Times bestseller, “The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.”

In an essay for CNN Collins wrote, “I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God’s majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.”

There are many scientists today who would echo the sentiments of Dr. Joseph H. Taylor, a 1993 Nobel Prize winner in Physics, “A scientific discovery is also a religious discovery. There is no conflict between science and religion. Our knowledge of God is made larger with every discovery we make about the world.”

Taylor’s words remind me of Paul’s inspired declaration in Romans 1:20. “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.”

Young people, don’t give up your faith, which is founded on solid, sound evidence, for unproven scientific theories espoused by atheists and infidels.

Continued scientific discovery and increased knowledge about our cosmos will lead honest scientists farther away from Darwin and closer to the Psalmist who exclaimed, “The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork.”

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

2 Comments

Filed under Creation

2 responses to “Intelligent Design Must Be Taken Seriously

  1. Science and Mathematics are infused in the Bible. The people who wrote the Bible were and are intelligent. They believed and believe in the Creator. Their neighbours believed in creation and created things. Christians are intelligent people who have faith in their Creator and the intelligent design, the wisdom, that still awes the scientists, the magi of our day.

    I have presented many papers at the Orthodox Academy of Crete (OAC). The OAC believes in the socratic method of coming together to philosophize to think about the wonders of Creation. When I was preparing my very first paper to present there, I noticed that Stephen Hawking had spoken at the OAC. So I asked a physicist who often stopped by my desk at the School of Engineering Science where I was the School’s research grant’s manager. I asked him. “What would a Physicist like Stephen Hawking have in common with a philosopher?”

    The Physicist replied: A philosopher is a natural physicist. A philosopher looks at nature and notices, studies, reflects upon and presents the wisdom he finds. That’s what we physicists do.

    That first OAC paper was called “Protecting the Priceless Earth: Lessons from the Magdalen Stories”. My Physicist friend and other scientific researchers at the School of Engineering Science helped me prepare my presentation.

    I have since written other papers for the OAC. In 2017, I wrote “Mathematics and the New Jerusalem.” In that paper, I demonstrated how Mathematics have been woven into the Creation Story, the Noah’s Ark Story, The Zacchaeus Story, the Woman with the Coin and the New Heaven and the New Earth prophecy. Now I see that other people are boldly coming online and touting “Sacred Geometry” too.

    Well personally, I think Sacred Geometry, is merely proof for an Intelligent Design that comes from a belief in the Creator. A scientist may describe the Creator as the Energy, Gases, Material and Intelligence, forming and coming together, and breaking apart and coming back together again with the right set of conditions to breathe and form a living humanoid species capable of reproducing themselves. While a person of faith may use the words of the Bible to describe that process. Quoting the Psalms, a Christian believing in eternal life can say with confidence “The Creator returns man to dust, saying, ‘Return, O sons of mortals’” (Psalm 90:3), because as Paul instructs: ” For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised.” (I Corinthians 15:16.)

  2. nicolas

    Why do you give more credit to a computer scientist than to a palaeontologist on the topic of the cambrian explosion? when you know about taphonomy and orogenesis, you have an answer about why the number of fossils seem to increase drastically during this period: the animals started to develop hard shells, easier to fossilize. For soft-bodied species we only find traces of them in Lagerstätten such as the Burgess Shales. But orogenesis is a capricious phenomenon, and the number of precambrian rocks that have been left intact and reachable by research is incrediblely low. All these bias made paleontologist well aware that the cambrian explosion may have been way more gradual, and you don´t need a bearded superthing to explain it all.

    Please stop trying to find excuses to justify your faith by distorting science to your own benefit. If facts contradict your holy book, you have to be strong enough to question it seriously. Remember that Charles Darwin was destined to priesthood, and that genetics was discovered by a monk, Gregor Mendel. The former took 20 years to resolve his dilemna and never abandoned his deeply religious wife, even after he embraced his agnosticism. Science does not preach morals, it describe phenomenons that are experimentally tested.

    Try to test creation for instance: what does life need to be a created, non evolutionnary world?
    First of all, The DNA should note mutate. If it does, it introduces diversity, change- it means: cancer would be impossible in a fixist world.
    then, breeding domestic animals would be impossible: we would not be able to hybrit plants and create ne varieties of roses through selection, because the types would be separated.. moreover, GMO technology would be absolutely impossible.
    then, our children should be our clones to keep our species exactly the same. No need to say that sexual reproduction would be impossible as well.

    So if an evolving world seem absurd to you, just imagine how crazy a created one would be…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.