Friday, January 13, 2006

Ken Miller Shatters Evolution's Top Arguments on the Colbert Report

Dr. Kenneth Miller, Ph.D. , a professor of biology at Brown University and a key witness in the recent Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, was on Colbert Report on Friday, January 12, 2006. While the interview was lighthearted (as everything on the Colbert Report is), Miller made some statements fatal to the evolution movement.

Miller began by claiming during the flu shot shortage of last year, those who received a flu shot should have been asked to sign a form claiming their affirmation of evolutionary theory. His claim was that the flu evolves and if intelligent design were correct, then there would be no need to receive a flu shot every year. Unfortuantely, the flu is still the flu and not some higher level of being, showing his example fruitless.

The second point Miller made was that the greatest problem with intelligent design is that the theory was too simple. Basically, Miller said, if intelligent design were correct, then biology classes wouldn't have enough to teach. So, during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, Judge Jones declared science to be determined by one's purpose and now science is determined by how well it can fill class time.

Miller's final point came when Steven Colbert asked him if God (Colbert was assuming God to be the designer) could have designed the universe to make it appear evolved with it actually was not. Miller's response was that he did not believe in a deceptive God. He added that he did not reject such a notion on scientific terms but on theological terms. Yet, that is the argument evolutionists use so often against intelligent design, claiming that design theorists oppose evolution on theological grounds and not scientific grounds. Apparently, they do the same thing and admit it.

Miller's lighthearted interview on the Colbert Report shattered some of the top arguments against intelligent design advocates. I am sure, however, that Miller did not intelligently plan this and it was a mere accident of nature.

No comments: