Intelligent design not very intelligent

May 8th, 2008 by Riley Firth

Ben Stein, of Ferris Bueller fame, has finally done something to make me forget how much I enjoyed his droning hilarity in that film. He has brought so-called intelligent design to the forefront of public conversation once more, reviving one of the most widely-accepted hoaxes in the history of mankind.

Ben Stein, droning sleepily.

This latest bit of nonsense is called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, and features Stein interviewing a host of supposed academics and scientists, disgruntled because they are ostracized from academics because of their belief in a concept called ‘intelligent design,’ which, despite its name, is a theory featuring very little intelligence. Theatres showing the film are scarce (thankfully), so I have yet to see the documentary, but that’s not my concern for this week. My concern is intelligent design, and this notion that Stein and his fans have that this is somehow a valid theory worthy of merit or even consideration, when the truth is, the so-called academics who believe in it should be ostracized and laughed at. Let’s look at this ‘theory’ a little closer.

Intelligent Design vs. Evolution

Intelligent design is the belief that the development of life on Earth was guided by some intelligent being, rather than being governed by the random processes of inheritance, mutation, and natural selection. It is based strongly in a belief that god, or some incarnation of it, created the universe and has guided the development of mankind and, indeed, all species of animal on Earth. This is in opposition with the currently accepted theory of species development: neo-Darwinian evolution.

I’m going to go ahead and dumb this down, so you biologists out there, just keep quiet as I put things in layman’s terms. To the neo-Darwinian scientists, things happen something like this: cells randomly mutate all the time. Sometimes those mutations end up favorable to the life-form (i.e. beans gaining a resistance to a certain bug), and thus that life-form is able to reproduce more offspring and pass on that trait. In the same way, organisms which develop unfavorable mutations die out before they can reproduce, thus killing those bad genes off.

Theory vs. Bullshit
Neo-Darwinian evolution is what one calls a scientific ‘theory.’ Now, in common lingo, a theory can be just about any conjecture or opinion. In science, however, a theory is a testable prediction of natural phenomenon based on observable facts.

Neo-Darwinian evolution, for instance, is a theory to predict how new life-forms develop from old ones, based on facts from the fossil record and much of the work done in genetics and geological research. It is testable by looking at the fossils of connected species, and in fact, some of the more extraordinary research being done actually shows the evolution of quick-growing bacteria in action.

Here’s where we get to the big pile of smelly bullshit: intelligent design. Proponents of this theory say there’s nothing to explain where life began, and they argue that there are too many coincidences and improbabilities for evolution to occur randomly. While it is true that we have little evidence supporting any theories of how life began, deifying our own ignorance and calling it ‘god’ is not a scientific solution.

Intelligent design proponents try to replace all that is unknown with some vague deity. This does not create a valid scientific theory. This is superstition masked as science; theology pretending to be biology. God cannot be tested, seen, heard, or even smelled. To the scientist, it does not exist, as there is absolutely no evidence to support its existence.

Expelled for no Intelligence

Stein’s documentary makes the argument that academics who subscribe to intelligent design have been unfairly treated: ridiculed, not taken seriously, and even fired. I argue that they were treated fairly; they were laughed at as academics for believing in superstition.

The biologist who argues, despite all evidence to the contrary, that leprechauns are real would be laughed at. He would be ridiculed out of any legitimate conference. Why is intelligent design somehow worthy of merit, despite its basis in myth and superstition? If belief in intelligent design is accepted as science, we may as well begin teaching classes on dragons, proposing theories about the evolution of unicorns, and offering majors in Chupacabra Studies.

So, for those of you fooled by Stein’s documentary, just keep in mind what a theory is in science. Don’t accept this unfalsifiable nonsense as fact, for there is no intelligence in intelligent design. See it for what it is: superstition masquerading as biology.

10 Responses to “Intelligent design not very intelligent”

  1. No common point between 9/11 and design inference? « Bogus Design Says:

    […] see this tremendously good post of Riley Firth, at The War on Bullshit. Tagged with: 9/11, Denyse O’Leary, Design inference, Pseudo science […]

  2. H Says:

    “God is the immemorial refuge of the incompetent, the helpless, the miserable. They find not only sanctuary in his arms, but also a kind of superiority, soothing to their macerated egos; He will set them above their betters.”

    - H.L. Mencken

  3. Stefan Says:

    I like your stance and applaud your candor. As a scientist and archaeologist, I have had to deal with superstition and myth especially around such wild theories as Atlantis, aliens building past civilizations, and the whole Mound Builders theory. Unfortunately this debate will never go away. Science and faith are two directly opposed ideas. Science involves the testing of knowledge through observable facts. While faith is the opposite in that one believes something without empirical observations to back it up.

  4. Dave Says:

    While I agree with most of your points about evolution vs religion, it is rather ignorant of you to comment on his documentary without seeing it first. Everything you state about the documentary is hearsay or assumption. I have not yet seen the movie either but I will save my judgments of it until I have seen it. Just like I saved my judgments of the last two Michael Moore, propaganda videos until I had watched them.

  5. H Says:

    “Everything you state about the documentary is hearsay or assumption.

    Does he need anything else? Intelligent Design is religious bullshit. Even if you see a movie with some “intellectual” bafflingly taking it seriously, it is still religious bullshit.

    It’s like spilling a glass of water. You don’t have to actually do it to know that the floor will be wet afterwards.

  6. Dave Says:

    If he wants to be taken seriously, yes he does need something else. It’s interesting that you seem to support science in the area of intelligent design but do not require the same standards to be set upon reviewing something (regardless of how absurd) challenging the mainstream scientific community. I’m not insinuating that Ben is correct. I’m simply stating that until you’ve seen the movie. You have not utilized any scientific basis for your statements. This is exactly the opposite practice of the point you are trying to make in regards to intelligent design.

  7. H Says:

    “You have not utilized any scientific basis for your statements. ”

    Just like the boneheads that believe in this bullshit.

  8. Dave Says:

    That’s exactly my point. He’s utilizing the same practice that he is critizing.

  9. Zander Says:

    While we do understand that Intelligent design cannot be proven scientifically, and is therefore impossible. I believe the real question is why do people still desire to cling to the idea that their is a creator who can completely ignore the known laws of physics to create us.

    Personally the real BS is how people in power use these beliefs to persuade others to doing what they want them to do.

  10. Riley Firth Says:

    @Dave
    While you make an interesting point, I would reply that I am not concerned as much with Ben Stein’s documentary as the unsupported belief if supports. My problem is with Intelligent Design as a scientific theory more-so than with whatever support Stein dredges up for the ‘theory.’

Leave a Reply