This book contains interesting theories of origin concerning the universe as a whole, as well as the various quantum particles the universe is understThis book contains interesting theories of origin concerning the universe as a whole, as well as the various quantum particles the universe is understood to be comprised of. This book gives its theories free of the God-of-the-gaps explanation that: "God made it so", which I agree is completely sensible and expected in a real science book, since science deals with matters of the physical world and only its most necessary constituents, not matters of faith or philosophy.
The book contains many profound facts on elementary particles and fundamental forces, and it is an interesting read on these points alone, however the "the Illusion of Intelligent Design" part of the title should have never been published as part of the title as there is ZERO argument against intelligence or its uncanny ability TO design, that doesn't surpass the sophistication of: "it appears designed, but it really isn't" unless you believe the mere existence of particles and equations to be sufficient evidence to reject intelligence, in which case, in my humble opinion such a claim backfires because it takes intelligence to even make sense of 'particles and equations' in the first place...I was so waiting for this "illusion" to be revealed, and it never happened.
I'm sure having that as part of the title helped sell more copies though...
The fact is, there is no force, either guided or unguided that can create the level of sophistication that we see 'intelligence' doing every day in all manner of disciplines and creative ways. Until one comes along, I'll be a major skeptic of those who belittle it's scope and capability.
A person can decry the validity of intelligence to CREATE something you'd PREFER to be blindly natural, but that hardly stands as any more compelling proof than accepting the opposite based on inferring from what we know intelligence is already capable of. In my opinion such a rejection of common experience offers far LESS proof....more