McFreedom

The Discovery Institute, a creationism Intelligent Design think tank has generated a list of "scientists" who have "doubts about the adequacy of Darwin's theory of evolution." They now have "over 700", with the most recent press release adding another hundred. Quoted notably in the release is Dr. Michael Egnor, an "award-winning brain surgeon named one of New York's best doctors."

Scientists have rightly responded to this with humor. The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) has created Project Steve, which seeks to find scientists who believe that "...there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution ocurred..." who are named Steve. As of the end of March, they had 795.

On the Institute's blog, today, Dr. Egnor wonders, "What if Darwinism Were True?" Presuming this is not an April Fool's joke - and certainly Dr. Egnor has seemed little if not overly serious - it is an astonishing admission for someone we're supposed to respect as a "scientist." Dr. Egnor wonders:

What if experimental evidence demonstrated that we could account for biological information (or whatever we call the astonishing complexity of living things) without inferring design? Would I lose my faith?

No, I wouldn’t.

First, if this is in fact the misunderstanding that has driven Dr. Egnor to the welcoming arms of the Discovery Institute, it's truly amazing. Evolution doesn't eschew design - merely a designer. The misunderstanding that natural selection is random is common amongst creationists, but that second word - selection - shows that it is, in fact, not random.

Regardless, Dr. Egnor then goes on to speculate on what would happen if

intelligent design were shown to be right, by scientific evidence? Most atheists would feel their faith in materialism greatly endangered, if not untenable. I suspect that is the cause for all their vitriol. Is Darwinism true? I’ll believe it if I see it. Is intelligent design true? Atheists won’t see it, because they won’t believe it.

So, to summarize: Dr. Egnor's position is that he believes in God, and that he believes evolution by natural selection is incorrect. If he's wrong, he will not change his position on God. However, scientists who are atheists (he speculates) might continue to be atheists even if evolution by natural selection is wrong, therefore they are the ones who are unscientific.

I mean, really, you can't make this up. "I'm right, no matter what the evidence is, but you won't accept the real evidence because you can't accept what would happen if you're wrong."