Intelligent Design

He sees that as a framework for much of the change around us: Nineteenth-century Darwinism was much more than a revolutionary scientific theory. It was hardly a scientific theory in any meaningful sense. Natural selection, as atheist philosopher Jerry Fodor has pointed out, isn’t a meaningful level of scientific explanation. It’s barely more than a tautology. Natural selection is an “empty” theory — “survivors survive” has no genuine explanatory power. As ID pioneer Phillip Johnson observed, Darwinism was really a new philosophical theory. It was the view that there is no teleology — no purpose — inherent to nature. Purpose in biology, Darwin insisted, is an illusion. Differential survival alone can explain “purpose” in nature. Darwin proposed that all of Read More ›

There’s a new study reported on at Phys.Org. This was a few weeks back. It seems that a “cousin” of a shark had a bony structure. And it appears that sharks FIRST had a bony structure and only subsequently developed a cartilagineous structure. The lead researcher Dr. Martin Brazeau, from the Department of Life Sciences at Imperial, had this to say: “It was a very unexpected discovery. Conventional wisdom says that a bony inner skeleton was a unique innovation of the lineage that split from the ancestor of sharks more than 400 million years ago, but here is clear evidence of bony inner skeleton in a cousin of both sharks and, ultimately, us.” Dr. Brazeau goes on to further say: Read More ›