(IO = Intelligente Ontwerp)

Mense wat alles wil verklaar sonder God, kan nie verklaar waar materie en energie vandaan kom nie. Hierdie twee dinge kan nie vanself ontstaan nie – dit is heeltemal teenstrydig met die wetenskap soos ons dit vandag ken – nêrens sien ons in die natuur dat materie en energie spontaan ontstaan nie. Ek dink in standerd 6 (graad 8) het ek al geleer dat energie nie geskep of vernietig kan word nie (Die wet op behoud van energie) – dit geld ook vir materie. Dit is egter nie net die oorsprong van materie en energie wat ’n dilemma is nie, maar ook inligting. Die volgende is ’n opsomming van die laaste deel van die DVD “Unlocking the Mystery of Life”:

Die volgende twee aanhalings wys die benadering wat gevolg word deur evolusie-wetenskaplikes:

Paul Nelson (IO – Biologiese filosoof):

Science ough to be a search for the truth about the world. Now we shouldn’t prejudge what might be true – we shouldn’t say: “I don’t like that explanation, so I am going to put it to one side.” Rather, when we come to a puzzle in nature, we ough to bring to that puzzle every possible cause that might explain it. One of the problems I have with evolutionary theory is that it artificially rules out the kind of cause, even before the evidence has a chance to speak. And the cause that is ruled out is intelligence.

Stephen C. Meyer (IO – mede-outeur van Science and Evidence of Design in the Universe):

Since the late 19th century, since the time of Darwin… scientists came to except a convention, a definition of science, that excluded the possibility of design as a scientific explanation (methodological naturalism)… if you are going to be scientific, you must limit yourself to explanations that invoke only natural causes. You cannot invoke intelligence as a cause. And yet curiously we make inferences to intelligence all the time. It is part of our ordinary reasoning to recognise the effect of intelligence.”

Watter tekens is daar vandag van intelligensie?

Ruïnes van Egiptiese monumente wat opgegrawe word en beelde op Paaseiland is duidelik nie die gevolg van natuurlike oorsake soos erosie nie.

Die voorwaardes vir intelligensie is (1) Onwaarskynlikheid en (2) Spesifikasie (Improbability & Specification). (Ander bronne gebruik “kompleksiteit” en “herkenbaarheid” as voorwaardes.) So ’n voorbeeld kan by Mount Rushmore gesien word waar George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt en Abraham Lincoln, vier van Amerika se presidente, se koppe uitgekap is – dit is ’n hoogs onwaarskynlike objek of gebeurtenis met ’n herkenbare patroon. Enige stuk rots in ’n berg is ook baie onwaarskynlik en uniek, maar dit spesifiseer niks of is nie herkenbaar nie. Ons herken egter die gesigte van die vier presidente.

Nog so ’n voorbeeld is skrif of ’n tekening in die sand op ’n strand. Dit is nie die golwe of die wind wat dit veroorsaak het nie.

Inligting

Die definisie van inligting/informasie is ook: Klein waarskynlikheid + Spesifikasie.

Presies hierdie beginsel word gebruik in SETI (Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) – die soeke na intelligente lewe elders in die heelal. Indien bv ’n sein gevind sou word wat inligting bevat, sal dit bewys dat daar ander intelligensie is in die heelal. Indien ’n sein ontvang word van bv priemgetalle, sal dit bewys wees van intelligensie, want priemgetalle is nie ewekansig nie, maar baie onwaarskynlik.

SETI het egter nog niks gevind nie. Maar in ’n ander heelal, baie nader aan ons, het wetenskaplikes ’n oorvloed van inligting gevind – DNS inligting in die kern van ’n sel. Terloops, daar is geen proses wat inligting meer effektief stoor as die DNS molekule nie.

Bill Gates het gesê dat DNS soos ’n rekenaarprogram is, maar dit is net baie meer kompleks as enige-iets wat ’n mens geskep het. Bill Gates gebruik egter nie natuurlike, ewekansige prosesse om sy sagteware te skryf nie, maar hy gebruik sagteware ingenieurs.

Uit ondervinding is geleer dat die oorsprong van enige inligting (hoogs onwaarskynlik en spesifikasie) intelligente ontwerp is, dit kom nooit uit natuurlike prosesse nie.

Dit laat ons met die vraag: wat moet ons aflei uit die oorvloed inligting in lewende wesens? Waar kom daardie inligting vandaan?

IO gee ons nuwe gereedskap om dinge te verklaar. Gesonde wetenskap is wetenskap wat die waarheid soek en waar bewyse vanself spreek. Dit maak nie sin om intelligente ontwerp van die staanspoor te elimineer nie.

Johathan Wells (OI – Outeur van Icons of Evolution):

When I look at the evidence objectively without ruling out the possibility of design, design just leaps up as the most likely explanation.

Is die skepping-evolusie kwessie belangrik?

Onder is ’n gedeelte uit ’n nuusbrief van CMI met die titel “The Voyage—not made for creationists!”, September 2009 wat terugvoer gee oor die fliek The Voyage that Shook the World en ook demonstreer hoe hierdie kwessie mense se geloof beïnvloed (Nick):

After one session, a man in his mid-20s (call him Nick) came up to CMI-Australia’s Dr David Cathpoole and said politely that he was disturbed; he would not have come had he realized it was a creationist film. Smiling, David said, “That was precisely the strategy, not to scare away people like yourself. Looks like it worked!” Acknowledging this, Nick agreed the advertising was in no way false. He was impressed that the film treated Darwin with dignity. He said, “The film has been very carefully worded, but what really riles me is this! Creation magazine!” as he picked up a copy from the table: “My students at school come to me with this magazine, saying, ‘Look, sir! There’s no problem with the Bible and true science…’; it’s so frustrating… and now I come here tonight, and discover this!” (A high-quality documentary by creationists, out in strength with resources, personnel, etc.) Nick had been able to ignore his students’ attempts to get him to consider the magazine’s arguments, but the film had broken through. To Nick, David said, “Darwin was a done deal, no more argument—yet this screening had left him greatly shaken.” Nick now had real questions, and was truly appreciative of the time taken to answer. David says, “We covered a lot of ground (e.g. design, anthropology, racism, religions, Dawkins, morality). Nick revealed that as a result of the ‘evolution as fact’ taught during his science degree, it had been easy for him to dismiss his ‘Christian upbringing in the church’ and stride out into life as an atheist—which as a former atheist I could relate to.” At one point the discussion got onto evolutionist palaeontologist Phil Currie’s comments (on the DVD’s “extras”) about soft tissue and blood cells in dinosaur fossils, “despite the impossibility of it in the dominant paradigm”. Nick said he would never believe such evidence existed till he “saw the photo”—and was then told such photos had appeared in Creation! David said Nick left promising to check out , with many other “indications that he really wants to seek out the truth, having been left truly ‘shaken’ by The Voyage.”