Comments on ID and creationism

Dear Jean Staune September 14, 2006

For those that haven’t followed the ID-like debate in Europe (France), and don’t know who Jen Staune is, I think the best would be to have a look at this UD’s page, then take a tour at Intelligent or Silly Design.

Staune is the champion of european anti-darwinists and an anti-intelligent design guy, sometimes 🙂

Intelligent Design sucks in Europe and he try by every mean to clearly state that he isn’t anything like a creationist or an IDer. But he claims that some supernatural being is behind the universe anyway 🙂 Not necessarily God, but some supernatural being… The same kind of rhetorical turns as when Dembski say that the Intelligent Designer could be an ET.

Now, I just received an e-mail from Jean, pointing to the publication of a letter(fr) sent to the journal “Le Monde“. Jean is always proud when a journal speak about him, even if it’s the posting of his protests.

What are the interesting points in this last one ?

• un premier entre des néocréationnistes défendant des thèses absurdes et des évolutionnistes cherchant d’autres mécanismes de l’évolution que les mécanismes darwiniens ;
• et un deuxième entre l’idée que les lois de l’univers puissent suggérer l’existence d’un principe créateur (le principe anthropique) et le mouvement de l’intelligent design pour lequel ce créateur viole les lois de l’univers pour que la vie sur Terre soit apparue.

He is upset because there is confusion between “neocreationnists defending absurd theses and evolutionists seeking mechanisms explaining evolution other than darwinian”. Clearly Jean Staune don’t want to be considered as a neocreationnist, despite the fact that he thinks that the universe was created by someone.

Then, he clearly distance himself from Intelligent Desing “for which the creator (read Intelligent Designer) bypass the laws of the universe to achieve life on Earth” an prone the anthropic principle (read God or Intelligent Designer, but much more intelligent then the one of IDers) suggested (not proven) by universal laws.

Dear Jean,
we will keep in mind that the only common points between you and Dembski are that you don’t like Darwin, that you have nothing better to propose as a scientific theory of evolution than darwinism and that you both believe that something supernatural acted to make it possible for life to exist.