| Revision as of 07:27, 22 May 2007 editDarthSidious (talk | contribs)780 editsm →Criticisms: That "criticism" had nothing to do with the book← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:22, 23 May 2007 edit undoArbustoo (talk | contribs)12,546 edits rv quite importantNext edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| ==Criticisms== | ==Criticisms== | ||
| ] is generally regarded by mainstream scientific organizations as ].<ref>National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science.…It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom." National Science Teachers Association Press Release ], 2005 </ref> Despite ID's ] status in the scientific community, no anti-ID scientists are interviewed in the book. | |||
| Critics point out that, although the book purports to investigate scientific evidence for a creator, of the experts interviewed, only Wells, Gonzalez, and Behe possess graduate degrees in a scientific field. The remainder have graduate qualifications in ] and ]. All of the experts interviewed are or have been in some way affiliated with the ], a conservative Christian think tank based in ], the main Intelligent Design hub.<ref>"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes." ], 2005, testifying in the ] trial. </ref> | Critics also point out that, although the book purports to investigate scientific evidence for a creator, of the experts interviewed, only Wells, Gonzalez, and Behe possess graduate degrees in a scientific field. The remainder have graduate qualifications in ] and ]. All of the experts interviewed are or have been in some way affiliated with the ], a conservative Christian think tank based in ], the main Intelligent Design hub.<ref>"Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes." ], 2005, testifying in the ] trial. </ref> | ||
| Some critics also point out that the book assumes the ] ], though the arguments presented equally hold true for any ], ], and ] ] concept. {{Fact|date=February 2007}} | Some critics also point out that the book assumes the ] ], though the arguments presented equally hold true for any ], ], and ] ] concept. {{Fact|date=February 2007}} | ||
Revision as of 18:22, 23 May 2007
| File:CaseForACreator.png | |
| Author | Lee Strobel |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Subject | Christianity |
| Publisher | Zondervan. |
| Publication date | April 1, 2004 |
| Pages | 352 |
| ISBN | 0310241448 |
| Preceded by | The Case for Faith |
| Followed by | The Case for a Easter |
The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence that Points Towards God (2004) is a book by Christian apologist and former journalist Lee Strobel supporting the controversial notion of Intelligent Design. In the book, Strobel conducts a series of investigative interviews of Christian scholars, all of whom are ID proponents, who attempt to refute naturalistic accounts of the origin of universe and the development of life.
Contents
Essentially, each body chapter consists of an interview with the expert(s) relevant to a particular field that claims to support the existence of a creator. The experts interviewed in the chapters and their topic(s) of discussion are as follows:
- Jonathan Wells presents a case against Darwinian evolution;
- Stephen C. Meyer discusses the relationship between science and religion, as well as the origin of life, arguing against the likelihood of abiogenesis without the assistance of a creator;
- William Lane Craig discusses the Big Bang and argues for a creator as first cause, invoking the Kalam cosmological argument;
- Robin Collins discusses the anthropic principle and argues that the universe must be designed by a creator;
- Guillermo Gonzalez & Jay Richards present a case that the Rare Earth hypothesis supports Intelligent Design;
- Michael Behe discusses irreducible complexity in biology as evidence for a creator; and,
- J.P. Moreland examines the supposed existence of consciousness separate from the brain, including near-death experiences, as evidence for a creator.
Criticisms
Intelligent design is generally regarded by mainstream scientific organizations as pseudoscience. Despite ID's fringe status in the scientific community, no anti-ID scientists are interviewed in the book.
Critics also point out that, although the book purports to investigate scientific evidence for a creator, of the experts interviewed, only Wells, Gonzalez, and Behe possess graduate degrees in a scientific field. The remainder have graduate qualifications in theology and philosophy. All of the experts interviewed are or have been in some way affiliated with the Discovery Institute, a conservative Christian think tank based in Seattle, Washington, the main Intelligent Design hub.
Some critics also point out that the book assumes the Christian God, though the arguments presented equally hold true for any monotheistic, omnipotent, and omniscient deity concept.
Some critics claim that much of the logic and analysis presented in the book, including the discussion of the Archaeopteryx, is flawed and presented in a biased view (it should, however, be noted that the book never presents itself as unbiased, as the title of the book is not The Case For and Against a Creator). Some critics also claim that new evidence brought to light also proves that the book's statement on Miller's experiments concerning life on early Earth are possibly incorrect.
Also by Lee Strobel
References and Notes
- National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science.…It is simply not fair to present pseudoscience to students in the science classroom." National Science Teachers Association Disappointed About Intelligent Design Comments Made by President Bush National Science Teachers Association Press Release August 3, 2005
- "Q. Has the Discovery Institute been a leader in the intelligent design movement? A. Yes, the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. Q. And are almost all of the individuals who are involved with the intelligent design movement associated with the Discovery Institute? A. All of the leaders are, yes." Barbara Forrest, 2005, testifying in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. Kitzmiller Dove Testimony, Barbara Forrest
External links
- The Case for a Creator at Amazon.com
- The Case for a Creator Official Website
- Another Case Not Made: A Critique of Lee Strobel's The Case for a Creator (2005) By Paul Doland