tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post7989919356019342860..comments2023-10-29T08:04:00.488-07:00Comments on Quintessence of Dust: Signature in the Cell: Chapter 6Stephen Mathesonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05057004085073574659noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-16730133305446334522010-02-28T11:18:54.105-07:002010-02-28T11:18:54.105-07:00Had I been asked for a review shortly after I rece...Had I been asked for a review shortly after I received my copy probably I would have given the book a positive review. I had no courses in biology during my years of formal education in three towns and two continents. What I do know I pick up from the odd Scientific Americian. But in terms of the cell I had read parts of the story but nothing that put the whole picture together. For me just doing that was very useful. My reaction as someone trained in engineering and applied math is that the combinatorial explosion is a difficult or possibly impossible problem for any natural solution to overcome. <br /><br />It would be good if a Christian EC/TE would write a good popular synopsis of the state of OOL thinking. <br /><br />Also I tend to discount much of the specifically ID material in SIC as it is based on Dembski's work which I have a lot of issues with already. <br /><br />"Steve, I'm a ways ahead of you in the book, and it doesn't get any better, sorry (but you knew that already)." I also am well ahead of Steve and am finding it hard to justify the time to continue.gingorohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11825691766111067082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-5971434909955004722010-02-25T06:40:42.298-07:002010-02-25T06:40:42.298-07:00Arthur: Yeah, I meant 500 pages of text. Thanks f...Arthur: Yeah, I meant 500 pages of text. Thanks for reminding me about the <i>other</i> hundred pages of references and notes.toddcwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913361618341959465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-16929439095703295672010-02-24T20:04:48.276-07:002010-02-24T20:04:48.276-07:00500 pages? Todd, somewhat tore out about 100 page...500 pages? Todd, somewhat tore out about 100 pages from your copy.Arthur Hunthttp://www.aghunt.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-88937859042338152832010-02-24T11:19:17.370-07:002010-02-24T11:19:17.370-07:00It is pretty clear that many people routinely &quo...It is pretty clear that many people routinely "review" books on Amazon without reading them - especially books on evolution.Michael Fugatenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-36159863086497367732010-02-24T11:16:46.385-07:002010-02-24T11:16:46.385-07:00Holy cow! My copy of the book just arrived in the...Holy cow! My copy of the book just arrived in the mail, and it's 500 pages! I didn't realize it was so huge. Steve, you deserve some kind of reward for plodding through this.<br /><br />Doppelganger: I'm not the least surprised by the DI's request for positive reviews.toddcwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913361618341959465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-76022839122747644972010-02-24T10:42:44.355-07:002010-02-24T10:42:44.355-07:00Todd:
"There are 165 five-star reviews on Ama...Todd:<br />"There are 165 five-star reviews on Amazon.com."<br /><br />It is my understanding that the DI sent out an email asking all those on its list to write positive reviews.Doppelgangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07019994267093407424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-28979476965680836152010-02-23T11:10:39.010-07:002010-02-23T11:10:39.010-07:00He could very easily have experimented on speciati...He could very easily have experimented on speciation by selecting on different isolated lines over many generations. This is his hypothesis proposed in "Origin" Ch 6. He just didn't think it was possible to see the needed change in his lifetime, but this is now demonstrated in many organisms. I think Darwin would be surprised how quickly selection can act - the work by the Grant's on finches is a good example.Michael Fugatenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-63267121761163208362010-02-23T07:12:58.045-07:002010-02-23T07:12:58.045-07:00Thanks for comparing this book with Origin of Spec...Thanks for comparing this book with <i>Origin of Species</i>.<br /><br />And, yes, Darwin did a lot of experimenting. Of course, he didn't experiment with speciation. How could he have?Martin LaBarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14629053725732957599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-52681254821281395132010-02-23T06:29:46.104-07:002010-02-23T06:29:46.104-07:00(I preface this by saying that I just ordered a co...(I preface this by saying that I just ordered a copy of this book, and I've only read a few pages of chap. 6 via Amazon's "Look Inside" feature)<br /><br />Regarding the W&C comparison, I didn't see that as hubris necessarily. I just thought he was trying too hard to show that he's a scientist, too. IDers are constantly harangued for being philosophers, engineers, mathematicians <i>but not scientists</i>, and I read that section as Meyer's response. Science isn't just about benchwork, and he's right, to an extent.<br /><br />But as one who earned the title "scientist" the hard way, I must admit it ruffles my feathers when amateurs just lay claim to "scientist" and act like they deserve it. I like to dabble in philosophy and history of science, but I am very quick to point out that I am <b>not</b> a philosopher or historian.<br /><br />I'm surprised no one's complained about his portrayal of Darwin. "Darwin also did little experimental science." (p. 139) Oh really? Darwin was constantly doing one experiment or another, and they had a significant role in <i>Origin</i>. I'll try to discuss that after I read Meyer's chapter.<br /><br />Dennis, we're still finalizing BSG plans for this year. Hope to have registration up by April or so.toddcwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913361618341959465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-87183530740639147742010-02-22T22:18:35.233-07:002010-02-22T22:18:35.233-07:00Meyer has to construct an environment for his thes...Meyer has to construct an environment for his thesis such that "design" is the only answer. Thus, he attempts in Signature to appear to have "run the traps" for exdy-x years of "careful study" and, what ho, design is all that remains as an explanation.<br /><br />It's not that Meyer doesn't understand the history of science, the subject of his PhD, or that he doesn't understand the general arguments about random mutation, natural selection, genetics and so forth. Those topics have been the subject of articles in Scientific American for decades and are readily understandable.<br /><br />No, Meyer slices and dices both history and science, and picks out the bits that are to his liking however small or thin.<br /><br />Meyer isn't interested in science at all. He's only interested in pushing the political agenda of the Discovery Institute which puts food on his table. Intellectual dishonesty is a living, I guess.Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04921039513056888571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-40570904718385618242010-02-22T21:57:28.962-07:002010-02-22T21:57:28.962-07:00Hi Arthur,
Yes, I noticed that too - and it crop...Hi Arthur, <br /><br />Yes, I noticed that too - and it crops up several times. I found it very distasteful, as did you. In my notes, it has something to the effect of "dressing IDers in the borrowed robes of W&C."<br /><br />Hi Todd, <br /><br />Things are fine here, thanks. I'm teaching first-year non-majors Bio again this semester and we just covered YECism (so that's why your ears are burning). :)<br /><br />Hey, is there any info on that BSG conference Joe contacted me about? Perhaps you or Joe could drop me a line over email.Dennis Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04585271870331546892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-11865146696581101322010-02-22T21:26:20.796-07:002010-02-22T21:26:20.796-07:00Hi Stephen,
I got the impression, when Meyer ment...Hi Stephen,<br /><br />I got the impression, when Meyer mentioned that Watson and Crick were not experimental scientists, that he was trying to emphasize some sort of similarity between his "approach" and that of W&C. Basically, he seemed to me to be casting himself in the same light as W&C, arguing that the fact that he is not an experimental scientist, but rather a collector of facts, is akin to what W&C were. <br /><br />I found this sentiment to be the height (depth?) of hubris. W&C sought out and embraced contrary data (not just ideas, but data), while Meyer is religious in his avoidance of data, ideas, whole bodies of work that contradict his largely unsupported assertions. The contrast between the two cannot be greater.Arthur Hunthttp://www.aghunt.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-1978555121651712862010-02-22T14:48:53.348-07:002010-02-22T14:48:53.348-07:00I didn't doubt that this book has positive rat...I didn't doubt that this book has positive ratings on Amazon, but my question was intended to refer to scientific reviews. There have been quite a few reviews at Biologos and origin-of-life researchers Gerald Joyce and Jack Szostak were invited by Darrel Falk to analyze his responses to Meyer's claims. Neither of them seemed to think that the book had any scientific merits.<br /><br />I don't dispute the point about royalties either but from a scientific point of view Meyer's entire career has been involved in ID. If it turns out to be a complete scientific failure he has just wasted several decades of his life. In light of this you'd think he'd spend more time trying to get scientists on board. He had vast swathes of the general public on board before he wrote the book anyway, they are not the people he needs to convince. Is ID scientific or not?Regnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-78615034640725139102010-02-22T14:48:47.515-07:002010-02-22T14:48:47.515-07:00I didn't doubt that this book has positive rat...I didn't doubt that this book has positive ratings on Amazon, but my question was intended to refer to scientific reviews. There have been quite a few reviews at Biologos and origin-of-life researchers Gerald Joyce and Jack Szostak were invited by Darrel Falk to analyze his responses to Meyer's claims. Neither of them seemed to think that the book had any scientific merits.<br /><br />I don't dispute the point about royalties either but from a scientific point of view Meyer's entire career has been involved in ID. If it turns out to be a complete scientific failure he has just wasted several decades of his life. In light of this you'd think he'd spend more time trying to get scientists on board. He had vast swathes of the general public on board before he wrote the book anyway, they are not the people he needs to convince. Is ID scientific or not?Regnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-92030559413983888792010-02-22T14:16:41.936-07:002010-02-22T14:16:41.936-07:00There are 165 five-star reviews on Amazon.com. Th...There are 165 five-star reviews on Amazon.com. There are also 37 one-star reviews, and very few in between. I often find this pattern of good/bad reviews characteristic of ID and anti-ID literature (and creationist/anticreationist literature). People either love the books or hate them. I wonder if that isn't symptomatic of the propaganda nature of the debate?<br /><br /><i>Why present them in books for the general public?</i><br />I hate to be cynical, but royalties are a factor.<br /><br />Hi, Dennis! I am well. You?toddcwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913361618341959465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-78076313016994056112010-02-22T13:45:06.673-07:002010-02-22T13:45:06.673-07:00Just out of interest has anybody come across a pos...Just out of interest has anybody come across a positive review of this book that is apparently supposed to re-energize the whole ID movement? <br />Why are more people not concerned by the obvious lack of scientific credentials displayed by those making the arguments? That's not to say outsiders can't have important new insights, but when people simply have no training at all in a field and have made next to no contribution to any area of science, does this not send up red flags when they attempt to overturn entire areas of science?<br />Why do people not see this? It's quite similar to when people promote the 'work' of obvious frauds such as Kent Hovind and Carl Baugh. <br />Furthermore, if these people really think they have genuinely new and impressive arguments why not take them to scientific conferences and meetings to present them before actual scientists? Why present them in books for the general public?Regnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-43583201678279271452010-02-22T13:13:00.703-07:002010-02-22T13:13:00.703-07:00Steve, I'm a ways ahead of you in the book, an...Steve, I'm a ways ahead of you in the book, and it doesn't get any better, sorry (but you knew that already). <br /><br />My thoughts as I went through these chapters were similar: Meyer doesn't even understand this at an undergrad level. He's basically reading a college text, misunderstanding a bunch of it, and then deciding he has the chops to declare a whole field of active research bogus. <br /><br />Todd, nice to see you. Hope all is well. <br /><br />Steve, hope the 12-step program is going well. I flunked out last week... :)Dennis Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04585271870331546892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-15607870955497682492010-02-22T10:50:43.749-07:002010-02-22T10:50:43.749-07:00Steve: How's that for contrast?
Equally fluff...Steve: <i>How's that for contrast?</i><br /><br />Equally fluffy I would say :-)Berend de Boerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11433622686361556089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-56260736733323969622010-02-22T09:11:24.139-07:002010-02-22T09:11:24.139-07:00Oh, sorry, sure, I can see that! Very, very gener...Oh, sorry, sure, I can see that! <i>Very, very</i> generous and patient and compassionate of you. I was also thinking that only some undergrads would remember the bit about the ribosome, so you really weren't far off.<br /><br />Good job! Way to go!toddcwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913361618341959465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-49440591531142005652010-02-22T08:49:37.583-07:002010-02-22T08:49:37.583-07:00Uh Todd, I guess you didn't get the memo. The ...Uh Todd, I guess you didn't get the memo. The response I was looking for goes like this: "Hey Steve, you're doing a little better lately. Your characterization of Meyer's knowledge showed generosity and patience. Nice job! I knew you could do it. See you at the next 12-steps meeting."Stephen Mathesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05057004085073574659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4948885059517209129.post-71502295490802336642010-02-22T07:25:57.645-07:002010-02-22T07:25:57.645-07:00Bio majors at Bryan at least know the difference b...Bio majors at Bryan at least know the difference between bacteria and viruses, and my biochem students learn that the ribosomal peptidyl transferase is a function of the RNA. Surely that's true at most schools. So how can you say Meyer has an undergrad level understanding of molecular genetics?<br /><br />I'll have to get back to you on Meyer's understanding of design and history of science.toddcwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07913361618341959465noreply@blogger.com