I’m not sure what to say about this, other than to say that you’ll need a hefty dose of credulity to buy into the crap that this guy is spewing (via Ivy Privy):
In “The Search for Intelligent Design,” author Duane Whitlock, 89, describes in scientific terms the structure of the universe and how it came to be.
The retired U.S. Navy Captain said he’s convinced his experiences cracking codes led him to a new understanding of science. Whitlock hopes to unleash these discoveries in his new book.
After Whitlock learned how to decode man-made structures, he wondered if he could figure out natural and scientific systems. Whitlock said he discovered that the universe was based on threes.
For example, there are three forces in the universe, electricity, magnetism and gravity and three primary colors – red, blue and yellow.
Hold on – first, physicists generally accept four fundamental forces in the Universe – gravity, electromagnetism, strong nuclear forces and weak nuclear forces. Every freshman science major knows this.
Second, there are three primary colors (for humans) because that’s how human eyes work. Birds, for instance, see four primary colors, and some other animals even more.
There are only three things, Whitlock said, that make up this universe – matter, energy and design. For example, in a chair, the wood comes from a tree, the design comes from man as well the energy to construct it.
“The mind is the intelligent part of intelligent design,” Whitlock said.
Design is a functional assemblage of matter, not independent of it (where does design fit into E=mc^2 ??). He displays the beginnings to such understanding in his chair analogy, but he skips right over the issue of design versus self-ordering, and assumes the former on a whim – that whim of course being that which theology teaches us.
I’d like to think that Whitlock is just stupid – and he is skeptically deficient, to be sure – but that’s too simplistic an answer. The answer, I’m sure, is much more difficult to explain, and probably involves a good dose of psychology, among other things. And I assume that his views of Godly design in the Universe is inspired by his awe of its richness (an awe I share), so I suppose I can sympathize a little.
But if he’s trying to get such ideas published, who on Earth would be absurd enough to publish such obviously incorrect notions of the Universe into a book??