Intelligent Design

Remember to use the secret handshake whenever you need to get an ID paper past the Darwinian goalies: “Although these observations do not undermine Darwin’s theory, …” ABSTRACT: According to classical evolutionary theory, phenotypic variation originates from random mutations that are independent of selective pressure. However, recent findings suggest that organisms have evolved mechanisms to influence the timing or genomic location of heritable variability. Hypervariable contingency loci and epigenetic switches increase the variability of specific phenotypes; error-prone DNA replicases produce bursts of variability in times of stress. Interestingly, these mechanisms seem to tune the variability of a given phenotype to match the variability of the acting selective pressure. Although these observations do not undermine Darwin’s theory, they suggest that selection Read More ›

Riffing off Joey Campana’s valuable backgrounder on the REAL relationship between the Templeton Foundation andID, Denyse O’Leary suggests that there is a power struggle  going on over at Templeton, with funding for ID as a key bone of contention. How else to reconcile the views of honcho Charles Harper and honchess Pamela Thompson? They are not singing from the same hymnbook.

For those who missed it, check out this animation presented by DaveScot.

I find the phenomenon of the DNA supercoiling problem and its biochemical solution even more compelling than examples like protein synthesis and the bacterial flagellum, since twisted ropes are familiar to everyone. This might make for another highly persuasive ID mascot.
Read More ›

Here’s a just released report that gives the lie to claims that the Templeton Foundation has uniformly eschewed support of ID research: In the past few years, the media has created confusion about the scholarly track record of the intelligent design (ID) research community, as related to funding from the John Templeton Foundation (JTF). The JTF is a philanthropic organization that funds research exploring science, philosophy, spirituality, theology, and their interplay. Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president of the JTF, was a central figure in this media drama, as he was falsely reported in the New York Times as claiming that ID scholars failed to respond to requests for grant proposals from the JTF. This false claim has been Read More ›

How much more difficult will it be to get an endowed ID chair at a major state university? Thanks to a more than $1-million donation from a gay male couple who hope one day to marry in California, UCLA’s law school is planning to establish what is described as the nation’s first endowed academic chair in sexual orientation law. The cash gift from John McDonald and Rob Wright will help fund the research of a still-to-be-named professor at UCLA Law School’s Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy. That 5-year-old think tank investigates such topics as anti-homosexual discrimination, the impact of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policies and the demographics of same-sex couples who have adopted children. Read More ›

Is there only one Designer of life or are their multiple designers? Here is James Shapiro’s take: Bacteria are small but not stupid:
Cognition, natural genetic engineering, and sociobacteriology

Bacteria as natural genetic engineers….

This remarkable series of observations requires us to revise basic ideas about biological information processing and recognize that even the smallest cells are sentient beings.

In the case of engineered products we often might think of designers (plural) versus a designer (singular). It may be that some Ultimate Intelligence created the universe and (by way of extension) engineers. But even for those of us who accept that there is an Ultimate Intelligence, it is not customary to say that God made automobiles and airplanes and genetically engineered food.

Can we find proximal sources of intelligent design of life without appealing directly to the Ultimate Intelligence? Even though I personally believe God was the Ultimate Creator of the universe and hence even the creator of the Wright Brothers, I generally still identify airplanes as the proximal intelligent design of the Wright Brothers. A similar issue may arise in identifying the Designer or designers of life on Earth.
Read More ›

Michael Shermer valiantly argued the thesis of his book, Why Darwin Matters in a debate with Bill Dembski, February 21, 2007.

Shermer said:

No one, and I mean no one, working in the field is debating whether natural selection is the driving force behind evolution.

Shermer defended his thesis honorably without resorting to any smear or ridicule of ID proponents. Nevertheless, despite his valor and commitment, Shermer fought and continues to fight a losing battle. A new book from MIT press controverts Shermer’s claims:

Natural selection is commonly interpreted as the fundamental mechanism of evolution. Questions about how selection theory can claim to be the all-sufficient explanation of evolution often go unanswered by today’s neo-Darwinists, perhaps for fear that any criticism of the evolutionary paradigm will encourage creationists and proponents of intelligent design.
Read More ›

O’Leary looks at the spate of anti-God books and other promotions for the new Church of Atheism, and suspects that atheism was way more fun in the days when it was just a quiet, Godless Sunday at home.

Now, the church – as we all know – is the weak point of any religion. And when all you’ve got is a church – and remember, these people are supposed to be “beyond” belief – well, to me, that sounds a bit like getting married and finding out that you have no spouse but two mothers-in-law … and more too, if you want them!

Read More ›

Here’s a new take on the problem of vestigiality from a colleague: Here are two examples of a “convergent, vestigial structure” — It’s the Chrysler PT cruiser and the Chevy HHR. Two different families of car have converged onto the same “vestigial running board”: Hey, design can converge and design can diminish.

Two Protein Translation Animations Read More ›

Here’s a thought about anthropic “coincidences.” Michael Denton, in his book Nature’s Destiny: How the Laws of Biology Reveal Purpose in the Universe (a tour de force which cannot be summarized here), points out that if metals could not have been smelted and refined at temperatures reachable through carbon-based fire, technology could never have arisen. What a happy coincidence. One can’t make cars and computers from wood and stone.
Read More ›

Just as Darwinism has inveigled itself into every aspect of life, so is ID: www.idarts.org.

In this video, a rabbit somewhere in Texas chases a big snake up a tree.

Recently, a house cat also chased a bear up a tree. (You have to scroll way way down to see a vigilant ginger cat at the bottom of the tree.)

One of the many reasons I have little use for evo psycho is that animal behavior is often not at all predictable. It may be difficult to say what behavior enabled a given animal to become an ancestor, and therefore what may be encoded in genes. And genuine common ancestors may be rare. Read More ›

I need to add a category “Yet Another Accident of Nature”. 😆