A short Book Review
By Fr. Abram Abdelmalek
Return of the God Hypothesis:
Three Scientific Discoveries Revealing the Mind Behind the Universe
by S Meyer
I enjoyed reading “Return of the God Hypothesis” book by S Meyer. This marks the completion of reading the trilogy of Meyer, Signature in the Cell, Darwin’s Doubt that we reviewed in our previous issues. In his first 2 books the concept of God, or who is the God that S. Meyer was pointing at as the intelligent designer was not clear. He was subtle in talking about Him. In his third one, he boldly introduced the God of the Jews and Christians.
The book starts with parading the Judeo-Christian journey of modern science and how devout Christian scientists developed the scientific methodology and research techniques banking on three famous metaphors and making the scientific world picture. The metaphors are likened nature to a book, to a clock and how natural laws work as laws in nature. He then dismantles the naturalistic theories of the origin of the universe and of life, like the big bang theory and the chemical evolution. He debuts the chance and necessity hypotheses and their effect on natural selection, mutation, and the origins.
Following that, he submits proofs of the God (Intelligent Design, ID) hypothesis through relatively new scientific discoveries namely, fine tuning of the universe, the origin of life and DNA information enigma. He also appeals to the shortage of time and the lack of precursors of life before the Cambrian life and information explosion.
He explains the abduction reasoning and the best inference of explanation of causal effect. He also affirms that intelligence is an observed natural entity and fits well with uniformitarian methodology. He makes a very strong case for the metaphysical creation of the universe and life.
Later, he compares the pantheistic, theistic, and deistic concepts of creation and settles on the theistic concept that Judeo- Christian God is the Creator.
One or two things I did not like in the book. Though Meyer experienced and still do, rejection of his work with the demarcation problem, he surprisingly used it to defame and discriminate against Creation Science, calling it pseudoscience and dismissing it as irrelevant. The other thing that it seems to me that he is trying to appeal to naturalists to accept his work.
By all means, it is a very good book, a best seller and worthy to read.