More on Bush’s Foray into ID

_{William Dembski

August 3, 2005

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Bush Remarks On ‘Intelligent Design’ Theory Fuel Debate
By Peter Baker and Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, August 3, 2005; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/02/AR2005080201686_pf.html

Comments

Tod: http://www.designinference.com/documents/2002.10.27.Disciplined_Science.htm Check out steganography- it's the best ;) .sblank_{August 4, 2005
August
08
Aug
4
04
2005
03:05 AM
3
03
05
AM
PDT}

ID makes us look for purpose and direction in living organisms. For instance, higher forms of animal life on earth require free oxygen in the environment. The early earth had no free oxygen and no process for its accumulation in the environment. An engineer wanting faster protein based metabolism would solve this problem by designing living things with a metabolism that produces oxygen as a byproduct. When sufficient oxygen has accumulated in the environment faster new metabolisms can be introduced that rely on free oxygen for speedy production of energy. In fact this is what happened on the earth. Presumably modern science and engineering is, or will shortly be, capable of this on a lifeless planet like Mars. The engineering concepts are collected under the title "terraforming". Further reading can begin here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraformingDaveScot_{August 4, 2005
August
08
Aug
4
04
2005
02:19 AM
2
02
19
AM
PDT}

Tod - we're barely beginning to understand possible mechanisms behind intelligent design. Here's a link to get you started: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_engineering What kind of testable predictions does it make? The big one is that it predicts the relatively instant emergence of complex structures that would otherwise not be reasonably possible to self-assemble via chance interactions of matter in the time, space, and environment in which it was presumed to have happened.DaveScot_{August 4, 2005
August
08
Aug
4
04
2005
01:57 AM
1
01
57
AM
PDT}

Tod - ID Theory is not about explaining the process of design. It is much smaller in scope. ID tries to detect (in my opinion, successfully) design in biological systems using scientific method. More about predictions, you'll find in "The Design Revolution" by W. Dembski. If you have a problem with ID this book explains what ID is and what it is not. Answers to your questions are in the book.Srdjan_{August 4, 2005
August
08
Aug
4
04
2005
01:04 AM
1
01
04
AM
PDT}

How does intelligent design actually work? What did the process of creation by intelligent design look like? Are there any hypotheses out there? What useful and verifiable predictions about the nature of living organisms would intelligent design help us to make?Tod_{August 3, 2005
August
08
Aug
3
03
2005
10:37 PM
10
10
37
PM
PDT}

I noted from the article referenced "teach students that there are gaps in evolutionary theory". Near as can tell the length of the gap in modern genetic evolutionary theory is the age of the universe minus the age of the oldest intact genetic material that can be sequenced for comparison. The gap is thus about 14 billion years give or take a few thousand. :-)DaveScot_{August 3, 2005
August
08
Aug
3
03
2005
08:01 PM
8
08
01
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply