A Third Continuation on the Horrible Dogmatic Partnership of the Physical Sciences, Life Scientists, and Medical Doctors

In yesterday’s blog, I discussed Victor Stenger’s book on "God: The Failed Hypothesis." Today, I discuss material on p. 59. There, Stenger says that a judge in Arkansas, William R. Overton, mirrored the ruling of Judge John E. Jones of Pennsylvania, and defined science using the five statements below.

(1) It is guided by natural law.
(2) It has to explain by reference to natural law.
(3) It is testable against the empirical world.
(4) Its conclusions are tentative, that is, are not necessarily the final word.
(5) It is falsifiable.

These judges defined science because they had to rule on the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. They ruled that intelligent design is an unconstitutional violation of church and state. Below, I show why these rulings were incorrect.

This judicial definition of science does not produce fair judgements. For instance, the origin of natural law is not defined. Every scientist knows that all natural laws might originate in God or originate in an exploding physical particle (Big Bang theory). Which origin is true? Unless the origin of natural laws are finalized, all court judgements are arbitrary.

In my book, I prove scientifically that God exists. Obviously, it is falsified automatically by the Big Bang theory. Further, since God’s acts are mirrored in intelligent design, the intelligent design produces phenomena in every thing in the universe. All of these phenomena are testable (both empirically and rationally) so that all phenomena are explained. Phenomena from God’s intelligent design do not produce the final word because neither God nor the intelligent design have any finality.

So, the definition of science used by these judges above is incomplete and can only produce turmoil among all US citizens. Certainly, their rulings on ‘intelligent design’ are wrong.