I have consistently argued that intelligent design neither rules out the common descent of life on Earth (Darwin’s single Tree of Life) nor restricts the implementation of design to common descent, as if that were the only possible geometry for the large-scale relationships of organisms. Thus, with regard to this forum, the truth or falsity of common descent is an open question worthy of informed discussion. To open up Uncommon Descent in this way reflects not just the ID community’s diversity of views on this topic but also the growing doubts about common descent outside that community. For instance, W. Ford Doolittle rejects a single “Tree of” and argues instead for an intricate network of gene sharing events. Likewise, Carl Read More ›

Here are some excerpts from The Plausibility of Life, by Marc W. Kirschner and John C. Gerhart. While reading the book, I find that along the way the types of statements which follow are to be found almost everywhere .

One of the objections (disingenuous, in my opinion) that the Darwinists have to ID is that “we don’t know who the designer is; therefore, how can we possibly identify his designs?” Well the following quotes make it quite clear that the designer’s designs are easily identified. All’s you have to be to detect the design is be a graduate of an engineering school. No wonder lots of ID proponents have engineering backgrounds (including myself.).

Here are just some quotes:

“In this turtle, males are produced at lower temperatures 78° F (26° C) and females at higher, 88° F (31° C), the opposite of the alligator. In a flip-flop circuit, not unlike a thermostat that would gratify any engineer, a small difference in the level of a regulator of estrogen synthesis can be amplified into one of two states, a high-estrogen state (female development) or a low-estrogen state (male development). . . .The result is a bistable switch driven one way or the other by the temperature dependence of the production of SF-1 protein.” (p. 94) . . . .

Read More ›

In browsing the New Mexicans for Science and Reason site and the Oynate Man prank (which I’d seen before but since it’s so hilarious enjoyed reading again) I came across this statement in the April Fool article explaining what would constitute real evidence against evolution: Read More ›

Often when we ask the evolutionist what might falsifiy the notion that humans evolved sometime in recent epochs from previous non-human animal species they tell us that discovery of human and dinosaur fossils in the same strata would falsify it. Read More ›

Arizona State University Professor of Evolutionary Biology John Lynch admits he teaches something on the topic of intelligent design. I shudder to think what it is he teaches about it but that’s neither here nor there for the point I’m about to make. Read More ›

This article lays it out and backs it up with quotes from the opposition. Read More ›

Intelligent design is not creationism
By Stephen C Meyer
Daily Telegraph: 28/01/2006.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/01/28/do2803.xml

In 2004, the distinguished philosopher Antony Flew of the University of Reading made
worldwide news when he repudiated a lifelong commitment to atheism and affirmed the
reality of some kind of a creator. Flew cited evidence of intelligent design in DNA and
the arguments of “American [intelligent] design theorists” as important reasons for this
shift. Read More ›

This just in from a colleague about the internationalizing of ID:

ID is part of an university lecture on the University
of Bern. The lecture is called “Philosophy of Biology”
and organized by Prof. Dr. Gerd Graßhoff. Read More ›

Here’s a revealing quote from Neil Greenspan about the evolution of complexity: In fact, there is no evidence of any kind to indicate that the magnitude of a system’s complexity poses any sort of barrier to an origin through evolution, as opposed to an origin through design by an intelligent agent. (source) Let me suggest that the reason Greenspan can find no evidence for the magnitude of complexity posing a barrier to its evolution is that evolutionists have never provided actual evidence for evolution producing biological complexity. Instead, they’ve only provided handwaving imaginative fairytales — what Franklin Harold and James Shapiro call “wishful speculations.” Since these are enough to settle evolution, how could there be evidence against?

He Did It

By EUGENE H. METHVIN
January 28, 2006; Page A9

On May 20, 1992, the state of Virginia executed Roger Coleman, defying a global outcry that included Pope John Paul II, Time and Newsweek. A circus of 50 cameras and 14 satellite trucks crawling with newscasters from as far away as Japan crowded around the prison to broadcast Coleman’s last words: “An innocent man is going to be murdered tonight,” the 33-year-old declared. “When my innocence is proven, I hope America will realize the injustice of the death penalty as all other civilized countries have.” Read More ›

From Table 7 of the Harris Poll

Belief in Evolution doubles from 17% to 35% as education goes from high school to postgrad.

Belief in ID triples from 6% to 17% as education goes from high school to postgrad.

Read More ›

From a colleague: Harris Poll: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=581 According to Table 7, belief in Intelligent Design increases with increasing education. (Ditto for evolution.) According to Table 8, belief in ID is more common among Democrats than Republicans. (Ditto for evolution.) According to Table 9, belief in ID is more common in the Northeastern and Western USA and less common in the Southern and Midwestern USA. (Ditto for evolution.) Also, taking into account this report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4648598.stm Belief in ID is more common in the UK than in the USA (17% vs 10%). (Ditto for evolution.)

Read More ›