Intelligent Design

De Novo Genes and Normal Science

Spread the love

Science can be wrong about some things and still make great discoveries and inventions. One can believe the earth is flat or that electrons are nothing more than tiny billiard balls and still make progress. The history of science is a fascinating story of erroneous theories and beliefs intertwined with remarkable progress. And even today’s life science research journals are full of asinine statements, arising from a belief in evolution, mingled with perfectly good scientific research. Most scientists can distinguish between the hard data gathered in the laboratory and the obligatory evolutionary framework into which the data are forced and presented. You focus on the former in order to make progress and tolerate the latter in order to get funded. Such are the practical realities of working in science.  Read more

3 Replies to “De Novo Genes and Normal Science

  1. 1
    RobertC says:

    Hunter,

    Don’t you think you are guilty of the same accusation you are leveling at the evolutionary biology?

    You see life through design-colored glasses, therefore it is apparent to you the data reflects design.

    But with what criteria? If all those scientists “doing perfectly good research” see it one way, you should have a really great proof of why that is not the case, instead of a statement of belief.

  2. 2
    Nakashima says:

    Dr Hunter,

    I’m not sure I would call lateral gene transfer a method of evolution. The gene had to evolve somewhere and then arrive in the new genome through LGT. In a similar way, panspermia does not explain abiogenesis. LGT does allow a long generation animal access the quicker evolutionary cycle of a bacteria or virus.

  3. 3
    ShawnBoy says:

    OT: Stephen C. Meyer has a great piece up on the CNN website. It’s getting bombarded with comments, many of them the typical anti-I.D. hog wash. It’s a very large audience, so having some of the brilliant minds from U.D. adding their thoughts to the discussion and making the Darwinists look stupid would be a great move. I’m trying, but I’m outnumbered.

    Sorry for interrupting this thread.

Leave a Reply