History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

ID coopting Darwin critique

January 3rd, 2007 · No Comments

Evo-News picks up on Orr’s critique of Dawkins. No sooner said than ID is given its false plus. There is a critique of Darwin beyond the ID argument. In fact the term ‘design’ is a complex pun: any complex molecular structure/sequence shows ‘design’, but that doesn’t tell us how it evolved. Complexity is merely an indication of low probability, i.e. the failure of random evolution.

The hypothesis that there exists in nature real design is a testable, scientific hypothesis which can be settled by data. Nature may show signs of real design even if we don’t know everything about the designer, such as where the designer originally came from. As far as intelligent design is concerned, in our experience high levels of specified complexity makes for a reliable indicator of intelligent design. Thus when we find high levels of specified complexity (such as in DNA or in the fine-tuning of the laws of the universe to allow for life), we can infer design. Design is testable, it has been tested, and it passes the test.

Tags: Evolution

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment