He thinks that the inference to design is good science.
He thinks information content is significant. So…
He’s right. The inference to design is of great value if design is detected, but it is also of great value even if design is not detected, because the design inference is a great starting point from which to study a complex system. The questions “Why is this system made the way it is?” and “What is its purpose?” are excellent scientific questions and are of fundamental importance, even if design is eventually discounted.Michael Egnor, “Foe of Intelligent Design Makes a Great Case for ID Science” at Evolution News and Science Today:
Only trolls truly disagree that the design inference is worth pursuing—as Dr. Novella demonstrates by not truly disagreeing, when it is something he cares about.
Also: Materialism is an intellectual trap, out of which neuroscience needs to climb Neurologist Steven Novella refutes himself. He first asserts that everything he knows is an illusion. Then he insists that his illusions slap him in the face with reality.