Saturday, May 07, 2005

INTELLIGENT DESIGN

Following are two letters. One is by a friend of mine and the second is the letter of a man who, I believe, could also be a friend of mine. My hat is off to Reverend Bristow. I could easily sit down and discuss any issue with such a man of reason and intelligence, without rancor for, at least, he’s a man who begins with facts. His interpretation of the facts of evolution is not the same as that of an atheist like myself, but his interpretation of the facts of evolution is at least based on the evolutionary evidence as we know the facts in the twenty-first century. To try to discuss the facts of evolution with a Bible literalist is like trying to talk to a Neanderthal who thinks that fire is a living spirit. Mr. Bristow brings us back to the original discussion of all humankind since time immemorial which is, “Does god exist?” Which existence, of course, can never be proven, but evolution, on the other hand, is nothing but the facts.

All I have ever asked from fundamentalists who refuse to accept the facts is that we begin with the facts and not hide our heads in the sand. If, after accepting reality, a man or woman still wishes to believe in the existence of a spiritual realm and being outside of time and space, I can accept their view of reality with a modicum of tranquility. I don’t sense a frightening Taliban-like irrationality hiding behind an American mask when I talk to men like Bristow.
__________________________________

First Letter:

I'm glad that people like Scott Minnich are bringing evolution into the light ("Conference explores intelligent design," April 8). The light of day is friend to the fact.

My problem with intelligent design is with the accuracy of the term. As I look at the abundant fossil evidence stretched out over evolutionary time, the millions of dead life forms that didn't work, the failed Neanderthal experiment, the feathered dinosaurs, all those botched trial models of all sorts throughout the millennia, I don't see any evidence of an intelligent design.

Why, for example, give a worthless set of eyes to the mole who doesn't need them or wings to the ostrich? Why create and destroy the Cro-Magnon experiment?

In fact, I see conclusive evidence not for intelligent design but for the sort of trial and error method that an inventor such as Thomas Edison might use. I see undeniable evidence that nature itself has used the trial and error method and that no intelligent design is needed to explain the species. Another name for the trial and error method that is evident in nature is natural selection. Conference closed.

Clifford Smith
Spokane, WA
_______________________

Second Letter:

As both a Christian pastor and an admirer of the research of Charles Darwin, I read Clifford Smith's letter with interest ("The design isn't intelligent," April 21). Smith argues that the fossil records negate the possibility of an intelligent design, because of the many "dead life forms," including extinct species.

His argument seems to presuppose that if an Intelligence were guiding natural history, then evolution would have unfolded in a straight line from single cell to (who else?) us. But because there are dead end branches in the tree of life, Smith seems to say, then it's simply a case of matter going at it blind. Providing this Intelligence thinks and acts like us, that is.

But suppose that when we finally discern all the interconnectedness within natural history, we discover that every life form, in its own time, played an essential role in the biosphere? What if evolution would have been altered or arrested without the presence of species now no longer extant? If so, then these "dead life forms" would constitute the cost of evolutionary change - or, one might equally argue, the cost of creation.

John Temple Brlstow
Spokane, WA


BUSH HIDES FACTS FROM AMERICAN PUBLIC

In yesterday’s SPOKESMAN REVIEW (April 27, 2005, p. A1) we learn that Condi Rice is holding back evidence which concludes that terrorist attacks are growing in number and intensity around the world and in Iraq. John Negroponte is also helping hide the facts from Americans. Liars are just exactly what Bush needed on his team and so he appointed them.


TOM DELAY IS A BUSHALIKE (SEE ABOVE)

Tom Delay, House Leader, also likes to lie and dissemble in order to keep his ethical lapses from getting their just desserts. Jim Drinkard in USA TODAY reports (as printed in the SPOKESMAN REVIEW, April 27, 2005, p. A3) that “All five Republicans on the House ethics committee have financial links to Tom Delay....”


THE TYPICAL CONSERVATIVE

Both of the reports above about ethical lapses in our Republican controlled American government is just what we can expect from those sorts of people. They have the morals and tactics of fascists. Of course, if you like what they are doing, then it’s just tough tactics to you. If the bulldozer is running over your foot, however, then the shoe is also on the other foot.

_______________________________________________________

“The universe is a pitiless, mechanical phenomena, and we either accept that or we don’t. Once accepted, however, peace settles on the wise man. Anguish, on the other hand, results when we try to encompass the “pitiless mechanical universe” and “a caring god” all within the same human brain.” —George Thomas

No comments: