ID Inquiry + Infinite Money

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@EricMH

Certainly, the ID movement has been too caught up with defending their existing work, decimating Darwinism, and also perhaps too focussed on the culture war side of things. I’m pretty dissatisfied with ID progress.

@EricMH your posts triggered me a bit and I didn’t get to acknowledge this. I agree with you here.

I think a plan that would be helpful would be for them to do a systematic to inventory to shed and disavow all their arguments that have failed. Cleaning house like this would do much to rehabilitate ID’s credibility. It would be painful, but I it seems really important. Honestly, if it could be done, it might actually be worth a JTF grant. I would respect it.

For example, there is no reason for any organization to be touting this article as a good thing:

@swamidass

1. This paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.6739 ) is put forward as example of CSI (ala Dembski) and is essential numerology. @evograd has linked to some clear rebuttals of this, and it has not been picked up by any of the leaders. Though, we still see it positively referenced at ENV: https://evolutionnews.org/2013/03/a_wow_signal_of/ . Do they stand by this paper? Do they agree it is an example of CSI? If not, when will they point out and clarify its problems?

@swamidass

There is irony here too, because ID sometimes points to the WOW! signal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow!_signal ) from SETI to legitimize their effort when they think they have a signal for design. Ironically, WOW! is rejected a real signal for ETI by SETI. They have never had a positive event, because they subject everything to ruthless (i.e. scientific) scrutiny and verification. Exact opposite with ID. Until they good at retracting all the bad arguments they have put forward, no one will trust them in science.

Do you think an agenda like that could arise in your camp? To ruthlessly get rid of your bad arguments?