James Tour on the Origin of Life -- 2016 Lecture

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

Tour is not an ID proponent, but much of his argument, both about the origin of life and about scientific orthodoxy, is consistent with, and reminiscent of, what ID folks have written on the subjects of the origin of life and the behavior of scientific establishments.

Consistent? @Eddie, isn’t it more fair to say that Tour is a willing ALLY to the Intelligent Design position? Below is a well-footnoted section of the Wiki article on Dr. Tour:

"In 2001, Tour signed the Discovery Institute’s “A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism”, a controversial petition which the intelligent design movement uses to promote intelligent design by attempting to cast doubt on evolution.[36][37] "

"To those who “are disconcerted or even angered that I signed a statement back in 2001” he responded “I have been labeled as an Intelligent Design (ID) proponent. I am not. I do not know how to use science to prove intelligent design although some others might.”

" I am sympathetic to the arguments on the matter and I find some of them intriguing, but the scientific proof is not there, in my opinion. So I prefer to be free of that ID label."[38]

"He had also said that he felt the explanations offered by evolution are incomplete, and he found it hard to believe that nature can produce the machinery of cells through random processes.[36] On his website, he writes that “From what I can see, microevolution is a fact” and “there is no argument regarding microevolution. The core of the debate for me, therefore, is the extrapolation of microevolution to macroevolution.”

FOOTNOTE 36:
Kenneth Chang (2006-02-21). “Few Biologists but Many Evangelicals Sign Anti-Evolution Petition”. The New York Times. Retrieved 2008-05-05.

FOOTNOTE 37:
“Signatories of ‘A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism’” (PDF). The Discovery Institute. April 2008. Retrieved 2008-05-05.

FOOTNOTE 38:
“Layman’s Reflections on Evolution and Creation. An Insider’s View of the Academy”
>>Tour’s Personal Comments on God and Creation<<

I think it would be fair to say that while Tour may not be your typical ID proponent, he clearly believes that Evolution could ONLY begin with God’s intervention. Wouldn’t you agree with that, Eddie?

This is where it gets awkward I guess. As I am quick to say say in my earlier postings… BioLogos and ID folks should NOT flee from the parts of their positions that are IN AGREEMENT!

BioLogos folks should accept that they think God directed evolution… while ID proponents SHOULD accept that God chose to work slowly in his creation through intervention in the evolution process.

And yet both sides agonize … the ID folks frequently can’t bring themselves to agree with Old Earth scenarios… and BioLogos folks frequently can’t bring themselves to say that only through God could unliving chemicals come together to make the first living things.

Alas.

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

I do not know Tour’s opinion on evolution and God. This particular talk was not about evolution, but about the origin of life. However, in the question period he was asked if he endorsed “God of the gaps” for the origin of life, and he indicated that his talk was entirely on the science, and not at all on theology, and that nothing in his argument came from his beliefs or non-beliefs regarding God.

@Eddie,

Read his link to his page on God and Creation … I think it is pretty clear that he doesn’t think there would be ANY LIFE without God’s intervention. I find it ironic that he teaches at the same school that taught Karl Giberson - -Rice University.

I think it is a shame that the battle lines are so fiercely defended that what should be a UNIFIER between ID folks and BioLogos folks instead becomes something to savage each other about.

Evolutionists really really really want to be able to have life be at least POSSIBLE via randomness … or without God’s intervention.

But I’d like to think that CHRISTIAN Evolutionists are not so determined to prove that point… it may actually help the BioLogos cause to accept that God is what made the first single celled life possible…

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie,

On the flip side of the coin, Christian evolutionists would no doubt LOVE to be able to point to “Tour-like” scenario as a proof against the Atheists of the world:

“God MUST exist, because otherwise, there could be no life.”

I keep going back to “God-Guided-Evolution” or E.G.G. … if we advanced a NEW and NEUTRAL term, we could avoid the PANIC that erupts when someone uses the phrase “Intelligent Design” …

[gbrooks9 (George Brooks)]

@Eddie

Your problem is that you are reading your own intellectual open-mindedness into the minds of the TE/EC leaders. Many of them have quite fixed, even dogmatic ideas, in the area of science and theology. Giberson would rather write a book proving that God creates by chance and randomness than by intelligent design.

@Eddie,

I try to introduce HOPE where all we find are reasons not to have any …

I think I have written enough (on the general topic of the ironic levels of conflict between ID and EC) for you to know that I know what you are talking about.

[martin (Martin Mayberry)]

I watched this whole thing and loved it! at times he sounded like an evolutionist but then at others times he sounded like a creationist! then when he got to talking about how he was disenfranchised by the establishment , It reminded me of the movie {that all evolutionist claim is fake} Expelled:no intelligence allowed :on you tube By Ben Stein where he alludes to just that point!

[martin (Martin Mayberry)]

His talk went way OVER my head, but he kept making reference to “So this could just happen in a cave”??? “so this could just happen in a mud puddle”?? the implied answer was, that NO it definitely could not!! The thing that shocks me the most is after his talk one of the students got up and said “so this is the God of the gaps”? why that student could set their and hear all that Mr. Tour was saying and not ask the same questions that Mr.Tour was putting out to them was astounding to me! that student was not listening or did not care or thought the lecture was fake! again I watched it care fully and i that you for putting it on this web site. It is mind blowing indeed!