Related to the discussion, I'd like to highly recommend yet another book. While browsing the 'Customers who bought this item also bought' list (related to DBB) on Amazon, I found this gem:
Heretic: One Scientist's Journey from Darwin to Design
by Matti Leisola & Jonathan Witt (editor)
Link to Kindle-version
Link to Paperback-version
About Leisola: Matti Leisola, Sc.D., is a bioengineer and former dean of Chemistry and Material Sciences at Helsinki University of Technology. An expert in enzymes and rare sugars, he’s published 140 peer-reviewed articles and won the Latsis Prize-ETH Zurich.
What's most fascinating about this book (I've now read ca 80% of it) are the many examples Leisola gives about the responses and discussions he has had with top scientists around the world. He has met, debated and had private discussions with many experts, ever since the 70's. The way he describes the many attacks and ridicule he has faced when questioning the ideas of Neo-Darwinism is enlightening, and frightening! The way the 'scientific community' behaves is clearly driven by pathological ideological 'thinking'. Leisola also describes the responses he has got from the media and religious leaders. He also describes several cases of colleagues, who in private (because they don't dare to say it publicly) admit the flaws of Darwinism.
Leisola is a world leading expert in organic chemistry and has specialized in enzymes. In his book he fills in some gaps I had from reading Behe and Schiller regarding the weakness of the theory of evolution/Darwinism and origin of life. So in that sense, it's a good addition to the already existing literature. It's also, like Behe, a moderately quick read – there's not too much complicated scientific jargon.
Reading Leisola, I started to wonder about how 'messy' the whole debate is. We have many groups with their own motives:
1. The atheist-materialistic Neo-Darwinists, who represent the 'scientific consensus' and who viciously attack (and even destroy) any scientist who dares to question Darwinism, and who god forbid talks about intelligent design.
2. The open minded scientists like Behe or Leisola, who want to get to the truth of the matter, and who see the clear and undeniable signs of intelligent design in nature. What is a bit strange about some of these people (I don't know about Behe), is that many of them are very religious, and they seem adherent of the Bible. I've checked some of the Twitter accounts of the scientists at Discovery Institute (proponents of ID), and many of the people they follow (like at least 50%) are 'Jesus followers' and/or 'Pastors' etc.
I don't see this necessarily as anything negative, as long as their science is sound, but it makes you wonder why these smart individuals haven't applied critical thinking in their reading of the Bible. Plus, it isn't strategically smart to openly be at the same time a top scientist, ID-supporter
and a 'Jesus follower'. It just gives more ammunition to the enemy, osit. However, one possibility might be (as Leisola implies) is that the more you research the details of the cell and their irreducible complexity, and since you're not open to the idea of e.g. 'alien manipulation from higher dimensions', the more you start thinking that some sort of 'God' is behind it all. Or, if you think of 'alien manipulation', it might scare you, and you start to seek refuge in 'Jesus'.
3. Open minded scientists (like in point 2.) who dare not talk against Darwinism, because thy fear the repercussions. They might in private talk more openly about their doubts regarding evolution etc.
4. Religious creationists who, surprisingly, are
at the same time supporters of Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection. Leisola explains this strange combination with the following: many Church representatives are happy with 'keeping the truce' with science and preserving the status quo of 'let the scientists do their
scientific things, and we do our
spiritual things'. It's a deal and a pact where the Church avoids debate, questioning and attacks by 'admitting' that Darwin's theories are true.
5. Religious creationists who are
against Darwin's ideas, and who are super excited about guys like Leisola or Behe, because they, in their mind, support the idea of an almighty God with their talks about ID. Unfortunately, these religious fanatics can be used as a 'tar-baby' to lump the proponents of ID with the 'crazy religious creationists'. Reading Leisola, this can happen because the universities and other scientific institutions do not allow any debates or discussions to be arranged in their facilities – that's a
big no, no! So, instead, the proponents of ID have to take the second best option of arranging their discussions at some church facility, and in the worst case IMO, with listeners who are only 'Jesus followers'.
###
Lastly, I want to throw in the idea that I've been thinking of how 4D STS manipulation might play a role in this. If you look at some of the debates between the two parties (e.g. on YouTube), you can sense with the Neo-Darwinists the familiar 'flavor' and mode of speaking that you sense with e.g. the SJW-radical-leftist types. It's almost like they're not human, and with that I mean (like Peterson has pointed out) that they aren't saying anything original
that comes from their own thinking – it's just robotic, automated and pathological ideological drivel. And what's most scaring, is the underpinning, somewhat veiled, vehement contempt and dare I say evil that some of these people are showing.
So, what I'm getting at, is that perhaps the 4D STS 'overlords' are in various ways advancing Neo-Darwinism and manipulating the thought patterns of some scientists, because they see the ideas of ID as a
serious threat. As long as people think that life is 'just an accident' and there's no meaning in life, because everything is just a result of randomness, the masses are easier to steer and manipulate. If they would start to think otherwise, that might expose the 'man behind the curtains'. And, this might also tie into the attacks and resistance that Jordan Peterson has endured – he is trying to help people find more meaning in their lives and to be more responsible and critical in their thinking.
