|
The Conformity Postulate; or,
Unintelligent, Ill-Designed, and On Purpose
The huge applause that greeted Judge John E. Jones III’s decision in the Dec. 20 ruling Kitzmiller
v. Dover School Board illustrates how the strength of conformity exists in inverse relation to the power of thought. The
Conformity Postulate correlates with an evolutionary process which is posited to be totally mindless and random. Thus the
Conformity Postulate conforms with Darwinian theory, which also perfectly corresponds with itself. No other methodology of
correlation is feasible, since by definition only that which is in conformity with Darwinism can be considered science, and
science is that which is only in conformity with Darwinism. Thus, mindless conformity is not only the rule but also conforms
to the ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover School Board.
The conformity postulate is thus perfectly self-serving, and unlike paleontology, geology, or other frustrating
sciences like biochemistry, it leaves no gaps in the record. Why should anyone be confused by sciences that claim the existence
of ‘jumps’ or fissures, through which alarming alternative interpretations might trickle? No, Judge Jones rightly
decided to view the entire series of mutations of incoherence as a trail of droppings left by one fossilized thinker after
the next. Thus no "turd" left behind as an awkward suggestion of an "irreducibly complex" process of digestion! Thus the entire
sequence, from mastication to digestion, may be considered as a "taste test" problem of the "prebiotic soup," which was much
too cold by the time nobody appeared on the scene not to eat it anyway. Thankfully, Judge Jones’ ruling tosses out this
culinary catastrophe from the province of legitimate science.
Postulating the conformity postulate has many other advantages as well. It would allow us to agree with newspaper
writers who called Judge Jones’s opinion in the Dover case ‘erudite.’ For example, a Miss A.W. of the Philadelphia
Inquirer wrote an article about how handsome Judge Jones was, or is, and that apparently he is "the toast of the globe
for his erudite opinion in the intelligent design trial." The Inquirer thoughtfully provided a picture (unfortunately
small, and unfortunately the judge was clothed) of a beaming Judge to accompany Miss W.’s gushy paean to the male beauteousness
of his person.
Concerning ‘toast of the globe,’ the writer might have added a modest disclaimer, to the effect,
"the toast of the globe… among people like us," but who cares for accuracy when celebrity journalism descends
upon our meager little lives in all the glitter of its unblushing nakedness? It goes without saying that people who think
like us are the only people on the globe who count, so obviously, it follows that "we," therefore, are "the globe."
As for ‘erudite,’ whether Miss W. even understands the meaning of the word is highly debatable.
Judge Jones has ridden hard into the camp of the Intelligent Designers on his white steed, breathing the fire of righteous
scientism regarding peer-reviewed scientific articles (he said that the partisans of Intelligent Design don’t have any,
which is blatantly untrue) and belching platitudes about the nature of science which, apparently, he has never studied. Judge
Jones took upon himself the heroic task of deciding what science is, and he declared that Intelligent Design is not science…
well, because evolutionists do not agree that it is. Evolutionists only agree that evolution cannot be intelligent except
when they are the ones doing it, in which case it is very intelligent, although some admit to a distressing absence of empirical
corroboration for it, an absence which they interpret as proof for unintelligent, ill-designed and purposeless evolution,
though not for a lack of intelligence.
This is science?
Yes, said Judge Jones, citing the ACLU as his incontrovertible authority for saying what science is. The
ACLU made up its mind long ago that Intelligent Design is Creationism and Planned Parenthood objected to it because it feared
if people believed in it they might start having fewer abortions. This substitution of the ACLU for "the
government" (i.e. as represented by the Dover School Board) was considered to be a great victory for American freedom, liberty,
Constitutionalism, progress, and sliced bread. The day after the robed and beauteous judge unveiled his decision, the Philadelphia
Inquirer gushed that, "What shines forth today is the strength and clarity of the Constitution, how easily it exposed
this attempt to swap sound science for one group's creed. How beautiful this document is, which allows all Americans to worship
or not, believe or not, see intelligent design in the cosmos or not… By derailing the abuse of liberty, Jones’
decision affirmed the liberty of all Americans."
The Conformity Postulate now makes it possible to take cloying cant like this as the work of grown-ups, and
not, as one may have thought, that the Philadelphia Inquirer is really Peter Pan in disguise. The only slightly worrisome
thing is the possible effect of the Conformity Postulate upon people, i.e. it might cause them to become extinct, and soon.
It has been found that the total convergence of the human mind with cant cannot yield further scope for adaptation in the
struggle for existence, i.e. the need to think. Aside from this problem, the Conformity Postulate leads to the certainty of
empirical evolutionism in the attainment of extinction through perfectly-achieved self-satisfaction, an outcome that is consistent
with the total absence of intelligence in the Dover decision.
January 9, 2006
|