12 Responses to “Another Review of The Matrix”

1. Bilbo Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 2:17 pm

   Excellent review, Oyarsa! Better than I could ever do! Ashamed to say that I haven't made much progress in the book, yet. Mayber after the holidays I'll have more time.

Comment by Bilbo — December 21, 2007 @ 2:17 pm

2. Bilbo Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 2:20 pm

   BTW, have any ID critics read Mike's book, yet? Or are they too afraid?

Comment by Bilbo — December 21, 2007 @ 2:20 pm

3. Nick Matzke Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 5:57 pm

   I've read it. It's basically a case study in what smoking ruins were left of ID after the ARN forum debates of 2000-2003, which is where PCP degradation, cytosine deamination, and most of the other inconvenient-to-ID examples that Mike Gene discusses in his book were brought to his attention for the first time. Basically unparsimonious wishful thinking is all that's left once you've admitted, as Mike Gene does, that ID isn't science, that IC systems can evolve, and that natural selection is an effective design mimic. Basically all he can do is hide his IDer way back in the origin of life, ignore all the evidence that even the Last Common Ancestor was the product of a lot of evolution, and then try a few cheap tricks like asserting that cooption is a "pure chance" thing (wrong) and therefore taking the massive evidence of cooption as evidence for his emergency-backup completely-baffling-how-it-could-possibly-work ID option, front-loading, instead. I may get up the gumption to slay the slain one more time sometime this break, but no promises.

   Merry Xmas,
   Nick

Comment by Nick Matzke — December 21, 2007 @ 5:57 pm

4. nullasalus Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 6:23 pm

   Well, Bilbo, it's clear there's at least one critic eager to have a go at Mike's book. And, apparently, it's going to be fun.

   Heya Nick Matzke! I'm curious of something. I know you're not exactly a big fan of Behe's edge of evolution. So I've got to ask, what's the edge of design? Are you saying that evolution can't be employed by designers towards a goal? Or that it can, but there's a certain point at which design can no longer be possible, and the only way to get further or particular results is creation by lack of intention?

Comment by nullasalus — December 21, 2007 @ 6:23 pm

5. MikeGene Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 6:31 pm

   Hi Nick,

   You seem a little cranky this holiday season. You are going to "slay the slain one more time?" Oh, oh. I look forward to your review.

   Have a good Christmas!

Comment by MikeGene — December 21, 2007 @ 6:31 pm

6. kornbelt888 Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 7:05 pm

   MikeGene, when you say that ID is not scientific, what exactly do you mean? And do you consider the blind-watchmaker hypothesis to be scientific?

   (Sidebar: does anyone else here think that Nick Matzke looks like the Family Guy?)

   Happy Holidays

Comment by kornbelt888 — December 21, 2007 @ 7:05 pm

7. chunkdz Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 7:47 pm

   Matzke's post scores as follows:

   Analogy = +4
   Discontinuity = +3
   Foresight = 0
   Rationality = -5

   Total = +2 Moderate inference of design

   The most probable explanation is that Nick Matzke is
   an insult bot.

Comment by chunkdz — December 21, 2007 @ 7:47 pm

8. Raevmo Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 8:03 pm

   BTW, have any ID critics read Mike's book, yet? Or are they too afraid?

   I finally received my copy from Amazon today. Reached page 3 by now, admittedly shivering with fear. During a quick browse I didn't notice any equations – is that because every equation halves the book sales (as Stephen Hawking once claimed I think)?

Comment by Raevmo — December 21, 2007 @ 8:03 pm

9. MikeGene Says:
   December 21st, 2007 at 9:05 pm

   Hi kornbelt888,

   MikeGene, when you say that ID is not scientific, what exactly do you mean?

   This is a position I have held and defended even before Nick Matzke showed up on the ARN forum. But right now, with all the Christmas and book stuff, I don't have the time to go into all that again. So I'll get to it after Christmas.

Comment by MikeGene — December 21, 2007 @ 9:05 pm

10. Bilbo Says:
    December 22nd, 2007 at 1:04 pm

    Alright, Nick's read it. Raevmo's starting it (probably ahead of me, by now). I think Pixie said he ordered it. Anybody else?

    By the way, Nick, when you write your colossal magnum opus, which totally vindicates non-teleological evolution and demolishes ID once and for all, I'll promise to buy it….if it's under $45. And maybe I'll have time to read it more quickly than I'm reading Mike's book.

Comment by Bilbo — December 22, 2007 @ 1:04 pm

11. Krauze Says:
    December 22nd, 2007 at 4:06 pm

    Hi Bilbo,

    If it's any consolation, I haven't even received mine yet. Darn postal office!

Comment by Krauze — December 22, 2007 @ 4:06 pm

12. Thought Provoker Says:
    December 26th, 2007 at 2:35 pm

    Bilbo asked…

    Alright, Nick's read it. Raevmo's starting it (probably ahead of me, by now). I think Pixie said he ordered it. Anybody else?

    Yes, I order it and read it.

Comment by Thought Provoker — December 26, 2007 @ 2:35 pm