Intelligent Falling

Intelligent Falling (IF ) next Unintelligent Design is a satirical response to the debate over intelligent design and thus belong to the preamble of religious parody.

The theory of Intelligent Falling is based on the fundamental assumption that objects not held due to gravitational forces on the ground, but are pushed to the ground rather from a "higher intelligence." The arguments supporting this thesis are similar to those that use the representatives of the Intelligent Design to enforce that should be taught in American schools Intelligent Design instead, or at least in addition to the theory of evolution.

Background

The satirical transfer performance here is not to doubt Darwin's theory of evolution, but Newton's theory of gravitation. The transfer of the unscientific arguments against one of the most famous scientific teachings (Darwin ) to another as well known (Newton) is the religious fundamentalist struggle with the insights of science ironic caricature and to another in a line of tradition with the run in the 17th century debate known scientific theory, the Copernican view of the world and for his sake, run against Galileo processes provide.

The first mention of the concept of Intelligent Falling was in a comic book by DC Simpson named Teaching Gravity, which was released on 16 May 2005. Shortly after Josh Rosenau presented an elaborated version in his blog Thoughts from Kansas.

Indicating an ironic reference to the attempts of creationists to displace the theory of evolution from American schools and replace it with their own fundamentalist and bible near vision - - As with the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the new approach became popular very quickly to relevant sites like The Onion or in various blogs.

Inspiration

The following is a translation by Josh Rosenau's article inspiration is playing:

It is only a theory - on the shoulders of a mighty error

Consider the following excerpt from a letter to Isaac Newton in 1692 wrote to the Reverend Dr. Richard Bentley, in which he describes some of the implications of his law of gravitation.

I 've been thinking about for a while, and I think it 's time to talk about my theory of Intelligent Falling.

When I learned that science can not explain the motion of three objects at the same time, I suggested this to question the Newtonistische dogma of " gravity ". Sure, Newton's "laws" can explain the motion of two objects, but Newtonisten can not explain how a third object would affect this movement.

Newtonism would be great if there were only two objects.

But Newton can not even explain this one object: the Pioneer spacecraft.

Newtonism would be great if it could explain the Pioneer anomaly.

Of course Newtonisten can claim to be able to predict the orbits of planets and the like, but if they can not even predict the movements of three objects, this is obviously a lie. Afterwards they can explain why they were wrong, but just next to it is also over. Has a Newtonist ever Neuauftauchen a comet predicted?

Newtonism would be great if he could explain where the planets are.

Newtonism would be great if he could explain where gravity comes from.

Newtonism would be great if you knew what is gravity.

There are many small " wenns " in Newtonism, and much discussion of " gravity ". I think these many little "if" s ("if " s ) add up to a big IF: Intelligent Falling.

IF believes that the movements of the planets and stars around the earth are too complex to be explained by natural processes. There must be a slider. If a man walks down the road and suddenly falls down, one can expect that this has happened because it has been pushed.

I believe that angels push the planets, and check the case of objects to each other. If this is true, there is no reason to teach our children the unbiblical error that the earth moves around the sun. When the slider wants the sun moves, there is no reason why they can not should.

The Newtonism is in crisis, and we should teach our children the controversy. If the Newtonisten can not explain what gravity is, why would you not then accept and agree that Intelligent Falling is the only credible explanation for the universe, the above statement of their "saints".

Analogies to Intelligent Design

Since IF was developed directly as a satire on Intelligent Design, it has, in addition argumentative analogies and similarities in the refutability on:

As the theory of intelligent design is not to refute IF by scientific experiments. Because ID or IF not make different empirical predictions. However, a variety of experiments and everyday experience confirm the theory of evolution and Newtonian mechanics. Nevertheless, there is always a principle in physical theories is the possibility that these are outdated, for example, can be treated as limiting cases of a sharper empirical theory. The current state of physics also contains many explanatory gaps. The incomplete declaration of the gravitational force is a particularly important example (see World Formula ). Such explanatory gaps provide starting points for theories independently of the established doctrines.

In the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is claimed that it pushes everything to the ground with his nudeligen appendages, this force is called Erdanpressung.