Sunday, May 20, 2007

More about Gonzalez

In a (probably vain) attempt to prevent lies about Guillermo Gonzalez becoming received truth by e-repetition - long linked chains of faulty information all cropping up in search engines way ahead of the facts - here's a page which responds to some of the anti-ID misinformation that has been spread around. It comments on the following false assertions:
1: Dr. Gonzalez's Work is about Intelligent Design in Biology.

2: Dr. Gonzalez Doesn't Have Many Published Peer-Reviewed Papers.

3: Dr. Gonzalez's Research Has Not Been Cited Often.

4: The Only Publications that Matter are the Ones Published Since Joining ISU.

5: Dr. Gonzalez Must Have Been Denied Tenure Due to a Lack of Research Grants.

6: ISU's Tenure Standards Are So High Even Many Good Researchers Cannot Get Tenure There.
If you are interested in an alternative perspective to the one presented by people who are set against anything that might be considered non-naturalistic, then follow the link.

"Privileged Planet", by Gonzalez and Richards, along with "Rare Earth" by Ward and Brownlee, are two of the most interesting books that I read last year - and I read a fair amount! Neither say much specifically about biology; but both draw very similar strands from almost every scientific discipline together - which is part of the interest of the books. Both address the fact that, far from being a completely insignificant planet, there are many things about Earth that make it highly unusual, and highly adapted to the development of complex, intelligent life. PP is the more provocative, in that it correlates Earth's habitability with its suitability as a platform from which to observe the rest of the cosmos, and suggests that this link is indicative of purposiveness.

As I said in my post below, I have yet to see any serious interaction with this thesis, which is as far as I can tell scientifically reasonable, testable, and falsifiable. I suspect that this is because most of the anti-ID community who might be interested in scientifically discrediting it haven't actually read what Gonzalez and Richards have to say, preferring instead to rely on the uninformed and inaccurate digests supplied by Panda's Thumb.