Anyone read Nyes book Undeniable?

[jacknife]

If he is intelligent and has integrity, why does he have to use misinformation and outright lies to back his arguments?

I kind of wounder what his motivation for using such methods are, does he himself believe it or do you think he is appealing to the people in this way to make money?

 

[Blue Wren]

I kind of wounder what his motivation for using such methods are, does he himself believe it or do you think he is appealing to the people in this way to make money?

https://www.facebook.com/jaywile
Dr. Jay L. Wile is the author of science curriculum that is designed for students who are educated at home.

If you follow, the links, from his blog (that he linked dozens of times in that review) you'll see where he sells his textbooks, for $85 each. I do not think, that he writes these textbooks, to be used, at schools where there will be credentialed science teachers, who would recognise errors.

He has a PhD in Nuclear Chemistry. This, would not qualify him as an expert, in evolutionary biology, no, but he would not be ignorant, of chemistry. He writes things, that are incorrect, about chemistry. I think, he believes, in some of what he writes, yes. I think, he has to know, he is lying, about somethings that his education, would have taught him better about, no?

 

[Loudmouth]

He has a PhD in Nuclear Chemistry. This, would not qualify him as an expert, in evolutionary biology, no, but he would not be ignorant, of chemistry. He writes things, that are incorrect, about chemistry. I think, he believes, in some of what he writes, yes. I think, he has to know, he is lying, about somethings that his education, would have taught him better about, no?

He gets oh so close to getting things right, and then get's them wrong. From Dr. Wile:

Now please understand that Nye’s main point is that the Second Law doesn’t forbid evolution. Despite the fact that he doesn’t understand the Second Law, he is correct on that point. What he fails to tell the unsuspecting reader is that the Second Law puts a constraint on evolution. If a mutation occurs that lowers the entropy of an organism’s DNA, an immediate, corresponding increase in the entropy of the organism’s surroundings must occur. Only then can evolution be consistent with the Second Law. So far, no rigorous mechanism exists to explain how this is possible.​

At least he didn't repeat the usual creationist canard about evolution violating the 2nd law of thermo. However, he does get the biochemistry wrong. The replication and extension of DNA molecules is driven by ATP hydrolysis. The change in entropy is the same no matter what base is added to the molecule. This is offset by the production of new ATP. Glycolysis and the Kreb's cycle (i.e. TCA cycle) are taught in high school. I find it hard to believe that Dr. Wile is unaware of glycolysis and the Kreb's cycle, or the input of high energy photons that produce the short chained carbohydrates that feed into animal metabolism.

 

[keith99]

If I might take a crack at one of the 'errors'.

p. 13: Nye
says, “Did you know that there are bristlecone pine trees in the western United States that are significantly older than 6,000 years?” This is false. The oldest bristlecone pine is tree
-
ring dated atless than 5,000 years old
(NOVA Online | Methuselah Tree | A Tree's Secret to Living Long)
, which is precisely what one would predict from the Biblical account of a worldwide Flood. It is precisely not what one
would expect from an evolutionary perspective.

It seems he is correct that Nye made a mistake.But let's count Wile's mistakes. First Methuselah is not the oldest bristlecone pine.

Now let's run with his 5,000 years anyway. Just how does this fit with a 6,000 year old Earth? It fits very nicely, unless one bothers to check a bit:

6000-years - creation.com

It turns out in a 6,000 year old Earth chronology the flood occurred somewhere between 1656 and 1665. So even using the erroneous 5,000 year age for the oldest bristle cone pine and saying it grew from seed as soon as the waters receded we have an earth 6656 years old.

Finally Wile claims that somehow the oldest bristlecone pine being 5,000 years old precicely not what we would expect under evolution. How so? This is disingenuous at best as it is designed to think that evolutionary theory woudl predict some other age for the oldest bristlecone pine.

Wile gives the wrong age for the oldest Bristlecone pine. He is wrong about that age fitting well with the chronology of the flood and he is at best disingenuous withe how such an age fits with evolution.

 

[keith99]

Because God exists, for one. But also because he created other intelligences in addition to creating us. We're just one piece of a large mosaic.

And you know this how?

Not counting angels that is.

 

[sfs]

He gets oh so close to getting things right, and then get's them wrong. From Dr. Wile:

Now please understand that Nye’s main point is that the Second Law doesn’t forbid evolution. Despite the fact that he doesn’t understand the Second Law, he is correct on that point. What he fails to tell the unsuspecting reader is that the Second Law puts a constraint on evolution. If a mutation occurs that lowers the entropy of an organism’s DNA, an immediate, corresponding increase in the entropy of the organism’s surroundings must occur. Only then can evolution be consistent with the Second Law. So far, no rigorous mechanism exists to explain how this is possible.​

At least he didn't repeat the usual creationist canard about evolution violating the 2nd law of thermo. However, he does get the biochemistry wrong. The replication and extension of DNA molecules is driven by ATP hydrolysis. The change in entropy is the same no matter what base is added to the molecule. This is offset by the production of new ATP. Glycolysis and the Kreb's cycle (i.e. TCA cycle) are taught in high school. I find it hard to believe that Dr. Wile is unaware of glycolysis and the Kreb's cycle, or the input of high energy photons that produce the short chained carbohydrates that feed into animal metabolism.

That someone with a PhD in any kind of chemistry could write that is kind of stunning. What possible mental model could someone have of mutational processes that would make that a sensible paragraph?

 

[Papias]

Jennae wrote:

Originally Posted by Papias

Jennae-

So do you now agree that the "review" you posted is filled with errors so egregious that they must be due to incompetence or dishonesty?

Do you think that promulgating such incompetence/dishonesty helps the cause of Christ?

Or are you so embarrassed by the "review" you posted that you are avoiding discussion of it?

Nope not embarrassed at all.

I know Dr. Wile from conferences I've attended. I'm merely passing on everyone's thoughts and asking for clarification. He's a very intelligent man with integrity. If he is in error, he will make changes.

Oh,so you are in contact with him. Cool. I can't wait to see how he defends these howlers.

Its been pointed out here how egregious these falsehoods are. Anyone with any familiarity with the field can see this (even a high school teacher would cringe at these), so he has to know that he has no idea what he's talking about - in addition to the fact that howlers like these must have been pointed out to him many times, so he's surely aware of them, which makes me wonder how he'll respond to you.

I wonder if he'll respond with more than a "oh, ignore them". We'll see.

In Christ-

Papias

*********************************

Chetsinger - you didn't answer my question:

To move away from hypothetical discussions where we don't have data (aliens), what do you think of the dishonesty/falsehood exposed in the "review" so far on this thread? Do you think this "review" helps the cause of Christ?

Papias

 

[keith99]

Right, so I think Mr. Nye is mistaken if he thinks that the discovery of extraterrestrial life would threaten Christianity. In fact, in the Bible there are already descriptions of extradimensional life, and intelligent life at that. We already know that we're not alone.

Nye never said that. He said it will change everything and if we do discover intelligent extra terestrial life it will change everything.

Either that life has had some interaction with God or has not.

If it has it also has either experienced a fall of has not.

If the answer to the first is they had no interaction with God it changes everything.

Either way the second goes it changes everything because it changes how the fall fits in God's plan. It changes things a lot if they did have contact with God, there was no fall and they are morally very different from us.

 

[Loudmouth]

That someone with a PhD in any kind of chemistry could write that is kind of stunning. What possible mental model could someone have of mutational processes that would make that a sensible paragraph?

I agree. I think they get lost in the false comparison of thermodynamic entropy and Shannon informational entropy. While there are some interesting parallels between the two, they are not the same.

As an aside, I did find this interesting paper on the thermodynamics of DNA elongation.

The thermodynamics of template-directed DNA synthesis: Base insertion and extension enthalpies

This one sentence does away with the creationist argument.

"It is well established that biosynthetic processes involving peptide, phosphodiester, or glycosidic bond formation are thermodynamically unfavorable unless they are coupled to “high-energy” phosphoanhydride bond cleavage from nucleoside triphosphates, the hydrolysis of which is energetically favorable."

If that isn't a "rigorous mechanism", then nothing is. The whole paper shows that the decrease in entropy caused by correct or incorrect base extensions is more than offset by the cleavage of phosphates from ATP.

 

[ChetSinger]

And you know this how?

Not counting angels that is.

Heh, it was angels I was referring to.

 

[bhsmte]

That someone with a PhD in any kind of chemistry could write that is kind of stunning. What possible mental model could someone have of mutational processes that would make that a sensible paragraph?

The ability of some otherwise intelligent people to compartmentalize, to fit in their personal faith beliefs, is quite amazing indeed.

 

[ChetSinger]

Nye never said that. He said it will change everything and if we do discover intelligent extra terestrial life it will change everything.

You're right, I read him too casually and didn't catch what he was really saying.

Either that life has had some interaction with God or has not.

I agree. For example, on earth we have interaction with God and the beasts did not.

If it has it also has either experienced a fall of has not.

I agree again.

If it has it also has either experienced a fall of has not.

If the answer to the first is they had no interaction with God it changes everything.

Are you assuming God must reveal himself to every creature he has created?

Either way the second goes it changes everything because it changes how the fall fits in God's plan. It changes things a lot if they did have contact with God, there was no fall and they are morally very different from us.

There are angels who have contact with God, have not fallen, and are morally very different from us. Why not extraterrestrials?

The first man and woman were given authority over the earth, but not over the heavenly bodies. So I don't see why the Fall would necessarily affect anything beyond the earth itself. Maybe it did, but I don't see any theological reason that it must. In fact, I can see a theological reason against it: the Israelites sometimes associated the heavenly bodies with heavenly beings, including unfallen ones. So in their minds the Fall would not have had any impact beyond the earth, afaik.

 

[ChetSinger]

Chetsinger - you didn't answer my question:

To move away from hypothetical discussions where we don't have data (aliens), what do you think of the dishonesty/falsehood exposed in the "review" so far on this thread? Do you think this "review" helps the cause of Christ?

Papias

I didn't notice you asked it, because you didn't quote me. I often skim through threads, not reading a post unless it stands out to me for some reason, such as quoting something I said.

I think all lying hurts the cause of Christ, and all truthfulness helps it. To be truthful with you, I've read little of this thread because I'm not terribly interested in it. I even glossed over most of the OP itself, because it was obvious I'd have to check multiple sources in order to critique it.

 

[keith99]

...
Are you assuming God must reveal himself to every creature he has created?

There are angels who have contact with God, have not fallen, and are morally very different from us. Why not extraterrestrials?

The first man and woman were given authority over the earth, but not over the heavenly bodies. So I don't see why the Fall would necessarily affect anything beyond the earth itself. Maybe it did, but I don't see any theological reason that it must. In fact, I can see a theological reason against it: the Israelites sometimes associated the heavenly bodies with heavenly beings, including unfallen ones. So in their minds the Fall would not have had any impact beyond the earth, afaik.

I have no opinion on what a God I do not believe in might do.

I find your position completely supportable as things stand now.

But it would at the least fall from favor if we found 100 other races of sentient beings all of which had fallen.

I'm not saying that is what we will find. I am saying that pretty much whatever we find, if it includes other sentient beings will pretty much rule out someones theology.

 

[ChetSinger]

I have no opinion on what a God I do not believe in might do.

I find your position completely supportable as things stand now.

But it would at the least fall from favor if we found 100 other races of sentient beings all of which had fallen.

I'm not saying that is what we will find. I am saying that pretty much whatever we find, if it includes other sentient beings will pretty much rule out someones theology.

I've indeed read some Christian positions that rule out any kind of extraterrestrial life so I agree with your last sentence. I think it hinges on how one interprets something Paul wrote, about all of creation "groaning in travail" due to the Fall. Did he intend to include the heavenly bodies, or not? I don't know. I draw my position from Genesis, where Man's authority was limited to the earth.

 

[Strathos]

If extraterrestrials exist (not saying they do), they might not have the same kinds of souls as us so they might not need the same kind of salvation, or perhaps God provided them with their own methods of salvation.

 

[Loudmouth]

If extraterrestrials exist (not saying they do), they might not have the same kinds of souls as us so they might not need the same kind of salvation, or perhaps God provided them with their own methods of salvation.

It would be interesting if Heaven looked like the Tatooine cantina in Episode IV.

 

[Strathos]

It would be interesting if Heaven looked like the Tatooine cantina in Episode IV.

The guy who was wanted in 12 systems probably wouldn't have gotten in, though.

 

[Blue Wren]

The ability of some otherwise intelligent people to compartmentalize, to fit in their personal faith beliefs, is quite amazing indeed.

I think potential financial gain, it probably helps with the compartmentalization process, for people, such as Dr Wile, no?

 

[bhsmte]

I think potential financial gain, it probably helps with the compartmentalization process, for people, such as Dr Wile, no?

One motivating factor indeed, but there are others, like a simple psychological need, to believe something to be true, because the pain of acknowledging it isn't true, is too great.