Absolutely superb tribute to a great thinker, who was also gifted with a sensor of humor. Bill Dembski's entire remembrance of Jonathan Wells is well worth a read, which includes this memorable line: "Jonathan was a shining example of someone who could not be bought."
I am 100% committed to ID and appreciate everything that Bill Dembski, Jonathan Wells, Steven Meyer, Michael Behe, Doug Axe etc have done.
The evidence is incontrovertible but I also believe it is being used in the wrong way. Here I am talking philosophy and not science and logic. There is a major issue. Namely, how did it all happen.
I’m not talking fine tuning which could obviously be part of the initial conditions but biology which is thought not to be. Or was it? How did life and evolution happen? Certainly not by Darwinian methods.
It is never addressed. Intervention is implied. Even Richard Dawkins agrees except it was not by God.
Thanks for this. With only so much time to listen and learn of topics in ID/evolution, I don’t listen to all I’d like to. Whenever I saw of an interview with Jonathan Wells, I’d listen to it. Really enjoyed hearing his wisdom. I’m glad you pointed out how he communicated clearly; not being simplistic, rather having done the hard work, he was way down the road of understanding well.
Bill, you’ve done it again. Superb description of Jonathan Wells. How wonderful to hear how you two became friends.
How impactful the attributes of Dr. Wells to the ID movement, er, revolution, you elucidate here so eloquently.
I’m thankful… for the books that Dr. Wells wrote, and especially for sitting under his tutelage during the summer seminar of 2016 and at least one Westminster Science and Faith conference in Philly. I am very grateful for these face-to-face encounters.
Thanks to both of you for your unwavering commitment and dedication to this movement and for your tireless work and sacrifice!
1. I have been called many many things in my life. Being The Brightest Bulb On The Tree Has Never Been One Of Them. Because, well I'm Not.
2. There are 5 words I TRY to keep in mind. But..I..Could..Be..Wrong. Because sometimes (often?) I am.
3. It's (pick a year) 1873. Based on what was Known Through Science, a good argument could be made for Materialism (there is no God). The problem is as we have learned (Though Science) more and more and more about The Universe, How Things Work, those arguments have gotten weaker and weaker and weaker. Until today I Just Don't See why there is Such Opposition to ID.
But then I'm not That Bright, and I Could Be Wrong.
Don't sell yourself short, Steve. Public humiliation and in particular not wanting to be seen as wrong is a big part of the problem here. Yes, we have the better argument. But so what if the other side controls the megaphone and the advancement of scientific careers? I'm reading Sharyl Attkisson's new book FOLLOW THE $CIENCE (the dollar sign is deliberate and the title is meant to be ironic). Scientific shenanigans have become so widespread and entrenched that a loss of confidence about the declamations of science may now finally be happening, which may help the ID cause. But the other side is not going to give up its privileged position as king of the hill except kicking and screaming.
"But the other side is not going to give up its privileged position as king of the hill except kicking and screaming."
This is why they Rarely Debate. Understandable on anything like a level playing field they don't come off looking good.
"Scientific shenanigans have become so widespread and entrenched that a loss of confidence about the declamations of science may now finally be happening,"
remember Michael Crichton talking/worrying about this on Climate Change.
This is one reason why the word EXPERT has the bad flavor it does these days.
Absolutely superb tribute to a great thinker, who was also gifted with a sensor of humor. Bill Dembski's entire remembrance of Jonathan Wells is well worth a read, which includes this memorable line: "Jonathan was a shining example of someone who could not be bought."
What a wonderful friend to have. And a great man as well.
Oh no! He was so fabulous, gentle and fascinating.
I got to hang out with him briefly a few times when I was at the summer seminar and I enjoyed it. I just got a good feeling around him.
I am 100% committed to ID and appreciate everything that Bill Dembski, Jonathan Wells, Steven Meyer, Michael Behe, Doug Axe etc have done.
The evidence is incontrovertible but I also believe it is being used in the wrong way. Here I am talking philosophy and not science and logic. There is a major issue. Namely, how did it all happen.
I’m not talking fine tuning which could obviously be part of the initial conditions but biology which is thought not to be. Or was it? How did life and evolution happen? Certainly not by Darwinian methods.
It is never addressed. Intervention is implied. Even Richard Dawkins agrees except it was not by God.
Thanks for this. With only so much time to listen and learn of topics in ID/evolution, I don’t listen to all I’d like to. Whenever I saw of an interview with Jonathan Wells, I’d listen to it. Really enjoyed hearing his wisdom. I’m glad you pointed out how he communicated clearly; not being simplistic, rather having done the hard work, he was way down the road of understanding well.
Bill, you’ve done it again. Superb description of Jonathan Wells. How wonderful to hear how you two became friends.
How impactful the attributes of Dr. Wells to the ID movement, er, revolution, you elucidate here so eloquently.
I’m thankful… for the books that Dr. Wells wrote, and especially for sitting under his tutelage during the summer seminar of 2016 and at least one Westminster Science and Faith conference in Philly. I am very grateful for these face-to-face encounters.
Thanks to both of you for your unwavering commitment and dedication to this movement and for your tireless work and sacrifice!
Thanks for The Design of Life.
Bill, Thank you for words of memory, tribute, and friendship. Lord, grant JW repose, and grant all to find gain in our loss.
A Couple of thoughts/observations.
1. I have been called many many things in my life. Being The Brightest Bulb On The Tree Has Never Been One Of Them. Because, well I'm Not.
2. There are 5 words I TRY to keep in mind. But..I..Could..Be..Wrong. Because sometimes (often?) I am.
3. It's (pick a year) 1873. Based on what was Known Through Science, a good argument could be made for Materialism (there is no God). The problem is as we have learned (Though Science) more and more and more about The Universe, How Things Work, those arguments have gotten weaker and weaker and weaker. Until today I Just Don't See why there is Such Opposition to ID.
But then I'm not That Bright, and I Could Be Wrong.
Don't sell yourself short, Steve. Public humiliation and in particular not wanting to be seen as wrong is a big part of the problem here. Yes, we have the better argument. But so what if the other side controls the megaphone and the advancement of scientific careers? I'm reading Sharyl Attkisson's new book FOLLOW THE $CIENCE (the dollar sign is deliberate and the title is meant to be ironic). Scientific shenanigans have become so widespread and entrenched that a loss of confidence about the declamations of science may now finally be happening, which may help the ID cause. But the other side is not going to give up its privileged position as king of the hill except kicking and screaming.
"But the other side is not going to give up its privileged position as king of the hill except kicking and screaming."
This is why they Rarely Debate. Understandable on anything like a level playing field they don't come off looking good.
"Scientific shenanigans have become so widespread and entrenched that a loss of confidence about the declamations of science may now finally be happening,"
remember Michael Crichton talking/worrying about this on Climate Change.
This is one reason why the word EXPERT has the bad flavor it does these days.