letter prompting my following response.
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 19:52:59 -0700
From: "David R.S. Robinson" <email@example.com>
Subject: Intelligent Design
I wholeheartedly agree with the recent letter regarding Intelligent
Design! I too was never exposed to the concept, or any other alternate
theories which question the dominant paradigm of Evolution. However, in
a recent discussion, I became informed of the Pastafarianism.
(http://www.venganza.org/) The crux of this viewpoint is the universe
was created by an invisible and undetectable Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Any evidence toward evolution can be explained by the fact it was
intentionally planted our noodly master. Furthermore, global warming and
all natural disasters are a direct consequence by correlation of the
decline in the number of pirates since the 1800s. (An illustrative graph
is supplied at the above website.)
As a fellow student who understands the need to battle intellectual
intolerance and a more open system of ideas, I'm sure Cara Lasley will
join me in demanding an equal presentation of Intelligent Design,
Evolution, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
David R.S. Robinson
Junior, Computer Science
To be completely honest, I responded initially with the following rant.
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 02:57:55 -0700
From: Scott Robinson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Response to Intelligent Design
Take responsibility for your own education.
It is a pity you were not exposed to the concept of irreducible complexity
before your tier III philosophy class. Perhaps, with an earlier treatment, you
would have come to understand why the subject is generally excluded from the
Irreducible complexity has no supporting evidence and no testable hypothesis.
In science, a theory requires overwhelming amounts of both to be widely
accepted. Instead, every proposed example has been firmly disproved. This
leaves the theory firmly in the area of philosophy - exactly where you learned
Moreover, the first identification of irreducible complexity came from Charles
Darwin in the seminal text "The Origin of Species" wherein he wrote, "If it
could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly
have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would
absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case."
You wrote, "I consider myself pretty well informed in Darwinian theory of
evolution" and also "... I was never presented with any inconsistencies within
the [Darwinian] theory or alternative ideas." If so well informed, take
responsibility for your education! If there were holes in what you came to
understand, why didn't you demand them to be filled? Your letter left me
wondering if you had performed any independent research on the subject.
Please note, I separate irreducible complexity from intelligent design. The
validity of intelligent design is a separate subject - it draws the additional
subjects such as specified complexity and the fine-tuned universe argument.
Junior, Computer Science.
I feel ashamed to have sent it as it shows how throughly I was trolled.