North Texas Skeptic - Vol 17 No 12 - 2003

Magazine Overview

Title: The North Texas Skeptic
Issue: Volume 17, Number 12
Date: December 2003
Publisher: The North Texas Skeptics
Country: USA
Language: English

This issue of The North Texas Skeptic features a prominent article on physicist Taner Edis' lecture, an editorial concerning the Texas textbook hearings, and a 'What's New' section focusing on lie detector technology.

Taner Edis Discusses God and Science

The lead article, "Taner Edis and The Ghost in the Universe," by Daniel R. Barnett, reports on a special November meeting of the North Texas Skeptics featuring Taner Edis, assistant professor of physics at Truman State University and author of "The Ghost in the Universe: God in Light of Modern Science." Edis' book explores humanity's search for spiritual reality beyond nature and questions whether the existence of God is a matter of faith or philosophy, and what role science plays in this debate.

Edis discussed traditional proofs for God's existence, such as the First Cause argument and the idea of design, noting how these were challenged by the rejection of the Aristotelian model and Darwin's theories of evolution. He presented two models of the universe: a "top-down" model where reality is shaped by conscience and purpose, often associated with religion, and a "bottom-up" model where reality emerges from a non-sentient substrate, favored by naturalists. Edis suggested that parapsychology, while sometimes embraced by liberal theologians seeking to redefine scientific boundaries, lacks empirical evidence and does not fit within a scientific framework, especially neuroscience. He also touched upon intelligent design (ID) as a discipline demanding a hierarchical reality, noting its appeal to theologians but also its scientific limitations and reliance on randomness for novelty.

Edis argued that Darwinian processes shape the development of intelligence, transforming artificial intelligence into open-ended, evolutionary behavior. He addressed the idea of evolution as God's method of creation, calling it arbitrary. However, he acknowledged that some theistic cosmologies point to arguments from modern physics, such as fine-tuned physical constants and elegant symmetries in physical laws, citing Einstein's puzzlement over the universe's orderliness. Edis explained that the Big Bang is credited with producing not just space but also time, with the singularity marking the boundary of four-dimensional space-time, making the question of time before the Big Bang akin to asking what lies north of the North Pole.

He further elaborated on quantum mechanics, describing how apparent symmetries are frameworks for accidents and that fundamental physics is replete with randomness, including zero-point energy fluctuations. Edis concluded that while randomness is fundamental, it is not an accident. He maintained that the sciences are the best tools for debating God, as religious "theories" have largely failed, and the bottom-up model of the universe makes more sense. The question of God's place in this random universe, if any, remains difficult to discern. The presentation was described as challenging and thought-provoking.

Editorial: Texas Chainsaw Massacre

The editorial, "Texas chainsaw massacre" by John Blanton, critiques the efforts of the Discovery Institute (DI) to influence the Texas State Board of Education's review of biology textbooks. The DI, which sent several representatives including Michael Behe, Bruce Chapman, Jonathan Wells, and John West, aimed to discredit Darwinism. The editorial highlights that despite the credentials of the DI's representatives, including those with degrees in biology and biochemistry, they failed to convince the board to reject the proposed textbooks.

The article details how Jonathan Wells' book "Icons of Evolution" was a recurring topic, with critics pointing out the low quality of the DI's work and its reliance on misinterpretations of real scientific research. An example cited is Wells' misrepresentation of research on peppered moths. The editorial states that the DI's "recreational scientists" were outmatched by actual scientific evidence, and the process was not a fair fight. Ultimately, the proposed textbooks were adopted by an 11-to-4 vote. The editorial notes that the DI missed an opportunity to promote good science and instead focused on minor points, ultimately damaging their credibility. It concludes with a sarcastic remark about the DI learning what a "chainsaw" looks like.

Politics at the Textbook Hearings

This section details the testimony at the textbook hearings, featuring Mark Ramsey of Texans for Better Science Education. Ramsey, a professional engineer, argued against the "de facto monopoly power" exerted over the teaching of evolution. He stated that his group, TBSE, is diverse and does not advocate for the inclusion of the Bible or creation science, but rather for the adherence to Texas law requiring the teaching of both strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theories. Ramsey clarified that his petition online simply asked for the enforcement of TEKS 3A, which includes teaching both sides of the controversy, and not the promotion of creation science or intelligent design. He reported that the online petition had garnered over 400 signatures and was escalating rapidly.

The testimony also included exchanges between board members and witnesses. Dr. McLeroy repeatedly raised points of order, questioning the relevance of certain questions, particularly those from Mr. Montgomery, who was probing Ramsey's background and affiliations. Montgomery questioned Ramsey about his involvement with any evolutionist, creationist, or intelligent design groups. Ramsey stated he was associated with a group of scientists examining the science of the issue. The exchange highlighted the contentious nature of the hearings and the differing approaches to evaluating scientific evidence and testimony.

What's New

This section, curated by Robert Park, presents several short items:

• The truth: what's worse than a lie detector that doesn't work? This piece discusses the development of more advanced lie detectors, including brain scan technology, that aim to determine what people are thinking. It raises concerns about privacy invasion and the potential for such technology to distinguish between true and false memories.
• Lie detectors: will they reduce insurance fraud in Europe? It reports that voice risk-analysis software has led to a significant drop in stolen car claims for one UK insurer, with other insurers in the UK and France hoping to reduce fraud using similar technology. The article references Richard Nixon's use of polygraphs to deter leaks, noting that their effectiveness can diminish as people become accustomed to them.
• Polygraph: Green River killer passed a 1984 lie detector test. This item highlights the unreliability of polygraphs by recounting how Gary Ridgeway, the Green River killer, passed a polygraph test in 1984, despite being suspected of multiple murders at the time. The piece suggests that a coin toss might have been as effective in uncovering the truth.

Skeptic Ink

A comic strip titled "Skeptic Ink" by Prasad Golla and John Blanton humorously depicts creationists failing to influence science books in Texas, with characters from the Discovery Institute expressing their frustration.

Events Calendar

The magazine includes a calendar of upcoming events for the North Texas Skeptics, including a Year-End Party on December 13, 2003, and an NTS Board Meeting and Elections on January 10, 2004.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism towards pseudoscientific claims, the defense of evolutionary science against creationist challenges, and the importance of scientific rigor in public discourse and education. The editorial stance is clearly pro-science and critical of organizations like the Discovery Institute that promote intelligent design and creationism under the guise of scientific debate. The magazine advocates for evidence-based reasoning and transparency in educational materials, emphasizing that scientific claims should be subjected to fair and systematic testing. The publication also serves as a platform for discussing philosophical questions related to science, such as the existence of God and the nature of reality.