Those of us who are ID proponents often hear the following from ID deniers (hey, if it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander): “You mindless, science-destroying, knuckle-dragging, religiously fanatical ID clowns keep talking about complexity. What’s the big deal about complexity? Complex stuff happens all the time by chance and necessity. Get a life, and stop trying to impose a theocracy on those of us who have it all figured out. The science is settled.”
So goes the highly persuasive, ever-logical, empirically validated, ideologically neutral argumentation of the ID denier.
The problem is that living systems are not just transparently intelligently designed; they are intelligently engineered. It’s not just ID; it’s IE.
Those of us who design and engineer functionally integrated systems, especially information-processing systems, know what is required. Design is just the first step. We do mathematical and proof-of-concept studies. Often it is concluded, early on, that the concept is fundamentally flawed and cannot be engineered. When it is concluded that a solution is possible, we build and test prototypes. Trial and error do play a role, but the trials are always planned in advance, based on what has been learned so far, so as to minimize wasted effort. Mindless, unplanned trials are never considered, because their number is essentially infinite, and the probability of success as a result of such an approach is obviously zero.
Once a proof-of-concept study has been completed and validated, and initial prototype engineering has shown promise, a team of engineers with specialized expertise (in our case, electrical, mechanical, aeronautical, and software engineers) pursue the final goal with much teamwork, thought, planning, and dogged determination.
A living cell is not just a marvel of intelligent design. It’s a marvel of intelligent engineering that far surpasses anything we have yet to dream about.