Friday, January 13, 2006


I'm confident that there's some elaborate attempt at comedy behind this latest from Dembski, but I honestly can't decipher it. To me, it looks like Billy is admitting that IDC is an elaborate scam and merely an exercise in PR.

For some time now I’ve been wanting to complement Darwinalia, Inc. [apparently to be stupid plush toys or something]… with an ID-based success and motivation course (complete with infomercials). I had been thinking about something like “Designed for Success” or “Designed to Flourish.” But the more I thought about it, especially with intelligent design taking the hits it has lately [my emphasis], it’s time simply to co-opt the language of evolution and interpret it in an ID-friendly way (in this vein, recall my post about intelligent evolution on this blog some months back — go here). Yes, ID is itself evolving! I was able to procure (.com and .org were unfortunately taken) and expect to start another corporation once Darwinalia, Inc. is fully up and running.

Let me reiterate that ID has been very, very good to me!
Much as selling snake oil has been good to Kevin Trudeau.

The major critique of IDC is that it is creationism with a new name, and a shameless attempt to circumvent legal rulings keeping creationism out of science classes. Also that it has no actual scientific evidence in its favor. How exactly does any of this change that?

The "go here" link contains this lovely text:

What would happen if the courts rule against ID, declaring it religion? In the long term, this prospect is of little consequence because the momentum is now with ID and the inertia with evolution. Don’t be distracted by the “thousands” of articles being published in the research journals that purport to support evolutionary theory….

I therefore offer the following proposal if ID gets outlawed from our public schools:
Wait. Before you read on, try to guess. What would be the best response to the finding that ID isn't science? I'd say, more research and a sounder scientific grounding. Billy apparently disagrees. The problem is that "Intelligent Design" isn't science, so
retitle it Intelligent Evolution (IE). … [H]ey, it would still be evolution, and evolution can be taught in schools. In fact, I think I’ll title my next book Intelligent Evolution: The Mindful Deviation of Evolutionary Pathways. Perhaps this book has already been written.
Because courts usually rule on what the title of a book says, right? That's why scientific creationism did so well in court?

You know Billy, what IDC (or whatever you want to call it) really needs isn't motivational speeches and infomercials (I can't keep from giggling about the prospect), but peer-reviewed research consistently showing promise in IDC.