Andy McIntosh

Andy McIntosh is professor of thermodynamics and combustion theory at the University of Leeds in Britain.[1] He is the author of Genesis for Today (2010), a book on creationism.[2]

A research group led by McIntosh has developed a spray technology known as µMist. It was inspired by the toxic gas which the bombardier beetle can emit to defend itself. This work was recognized as an "outstanding contribution to innovation and technology" by Times Higher Education at an award ceremony in London in 2010.[3]

## Contents

* 1 Encounter with Dawkins
* 2 Publications and patents
* 3 References
* 4 See also

## Encounter with Dawkins[edit]

In 2006, McIntosh, an expert in thermodynamics, has provoked the ire of Richard Dawkins by highlighting the thermodynamic problems which must have been overcome if the living world has come about by undirected natural processes. An exchange between them started in a live debate on BBC Northern Ireland's Sunday Sequence on 10 December. When the subject of thermodynamics was brought up by Professor McIntosh, Professor Dawkins immediate response was to launch a fallacious personal attack that was met with protests from the studio audience and after which there was not enough time for either side to develop the scientific argument.[4] Richard Dawkins wrote a letter to the Guardian denouncing McIntosh's view that evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[5] Three days later, Andy McIntosh has written the defense of his position at BBC. There he explained that whether Dawkins likes it or not, he has a scientific case which is a challenge to the neo-Darwinian attempts to explain life in terms of common descent and this is a straightforward case of testable science versus the modern evolutionary ‘just-so’ story telling.[6] Later McIntosh added that "My position is to side with experimental science and not with 'just so' attempts to get round the clear evidence of design in nature."[7]

## Publications and patents[edit]

* Origins: Examining the Evidence (Truth in Science, 2011) ISBN 978-0956963109
* The Delusion of Evolution (New Life Publishing Co, 2010) ISBN 978-1904835028
* Genesis for Today: Showing the Relevance of the Creation/Evolution Debate to Today's Society (foreword by Ken Ham) (Day One Publications, 2000) ISBN 978-1-903087-15-2
* Shah, AA; Brindley, J; McIntosh, AC; Radernacher, J The effects of heat exchange and fluid production on the ignition of a porous solid. Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications, vol. 9, pp. 562–584. 2008.
* McIntosh, AC Combustion, fire, and explosion in nature - some biomimetic possibilities. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science, vol. 221, pp. 1157–1163. 2007.
* Beheshti, N; McIntosh, AC A biomimetic study of the explosive discharge of the Bombardier Beetle. International Journal of Design and Nature, vol. 1, pp. 61–69. 2007.
* McIntosh, AC; Beheshti, N Drug Delivery – Spray system based on bombardier beetle. 2010.
* McIntosh, AC; Beheshti, N 60/720,716 (UOL Ref: UOL 05012/US/P1) Vapour Explosion Device. 2005.

## References[edit]

1. ↑ Andrew McIntosh, mathematics. creation.com. Retrieved on December 14, 2014.
2. ↑ McIntosh, Andy, Genesis for Today: The Relevance of the Creation/Evolution Debate to Today's Society 4th edition (Creation Points), 2010
3. ↑ BBC News "Beetle defence inspires University of Leeds research", BBC News, 9 December 2010
4. ↑ McIntosh, Dawkins and thermodynamics. truthinscience.org. Retrieved on December 14, 2014. “... In the last few minutes of the programme he heeded the protests of the studio audience and started a scientific response. But at this stage there was not time for either side to develop the argument. ... Note added 8 Jan: On the programme (linked above) Professor McIntosh stated: "My whole point is this: that without information in a system for a machine you cannot form a machine. Without machines already there you cannot form a machine: that's the abiogenesis problem. Even after that, more complex machines cannot be made from simpler machines."”
5. ↑ Richard Dawkins (December 27, 2006). Big mistake. theguardian.com. Retrieved on December 14, 2014.
6. ↑ McIntosh, A.C. (December 30, 2006). Andy McIntosh replies. BBC. Retrieved on December 14, 2014. “Scientists like myself who believe in Creation have no problem with natural selection. It is simply the natural equivalent of artificial selection. But natural selection has no power to create new functional structures. It does not increase information and does not build machines which are not there already (either fully developed or in embryonic form). The principles of thermodynamics even in open systems do not allow a new function using raised free energy levels to be achieved without new machinery. And new machines are not made by simply adding energy to existing machines. This was the point at issue in the programme of Dec 10th. Intelligence is needed. And this thesis is falsifiable. If anyone was to take an existing chemical machine and produce a different chemical machine which was not there before (either as a sub part or latently coded for in the DNA template) then this argument would have been falsified. No one has ever achieved this. I suggest that all the listeners read again if they have not done already, the excellent book by Wilder Smith called 'The natural sciences know nothing of evolution'. It is available on Amazon.”
7. ↑ William Crawley. The Thermodynamics of Andy McIntosh. BBC. Retrieved on January 7, 2007. “The creationist campaigner Andy McIntosh spoke to me on today's Sunday Sequence, following Richard Dawkins's public challenge to his professional status as a scientist and professor at Leeds University. Dr McIntosh has claimed that biological evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which asserts that systems must become more disordered over time. ... After today's programme, I received the following comment by email from Andy McIntosh. Dr McIntosh has asked me to publish this in full on the blog today, which I am happy to do. ...Thermodynamics as I have explained before, does lie at the heart of the debate. Boeing 777s cannot be made in a car factory unless the machinery is available to do so. Similarly the human brain cannot be formed from simpler machines if there is no machinery available to do this. Spontaneously forming such will not happen, even with natural selective forces at work. All natural selection will do is select from what is there already. It will not create a new machine which was not there before (either as a sub-machine or coded in embryonic form). An open thermodynamic system is not the answer either since simply adding energy to existing machinery will not change what is there already to a new machine. To quote Wilder Smith whose book 'The natural sciences know nothing of evolution' is available on the web - p. 146 "Today it is simply unscientific to claim that the fantastically reduced entropy of the human brain, of the dolphin's sound lens, and of the eye of a fossilised trilobite simply "happened", for experimental experience has shown that such miracles just do not "happen"." My position is to side with experimental science and not with 'just so' attempts to get round the clear evidence of design in nature. At the very least these matters should be critically considered in science teaching today.”

## See also[edit]

* Maxwell’s intelligent agent
* Science vs. Evolutionism