A renowned writer and Yale University computer science professor has denounced Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, arguing it has too many holes and is now too old to be a probable scientific theory.
The left can no longer proceed with unexamined views of evolution based on Darwinism. It has been outflanked by the Intelligent Design movement whose critiques ma…
Behe’s new book has arrived and the debate over evolution continues ad infinitum. I have not as yet read the book but google books has a hefty selection. I question at once the misleading idea that ‘design’ challenges ‘evolution’: it only challenges darwinism and Behe is either careless on this point or tossing a crust to hard core creationists. But more generally the case for design in nature is strong…until ID proponents come along and spoil their own argument. Meanwhile the clueless realm of darwinists still to this day peddles the dogmas of evolution by accident in the theology of Dawkins et al. Sometimes you feel like shouting in the ear of the darwinists: they have done an immense disservice in confusing the public so badly for so long. But the ID proponents are their own worst enemy. Continue reading does the design argument need an ‘atheist’ framework?…//Darwin Devolves: The New Science About DNA That Challenges Evolution – Michael J. Behe – Google Books
The issues of ‘design’, teleology, proofs of the existence of god, and finally ‘intelligent’ design are all different and can’t be safely collated in a typical secular humanism diatribe against theism. We discussed yesterday the confusion over ‘design’ and ‘intelligent design’. Design in the realm of biology is almost an inevitable conclusion, but it doesn’t follow it is the result of intelligence, although it might certainly look intelligent…
Teleology is probably the case and this is not an argument for theism. Teleology is visible in the eonic effect, although it is visible only as directionality and must be reconciled with free agency.
Teleology is not proof of divinity, if only because the term ‘god’ is so incoherent we can’t really use it for anything.
Source: The Teleological Argument
The groundbreaking, “seminal work” (Time) on intelligent design that dares to ask, was Darwin wrong? In 1996, Darwin’s Black Box helped to launch the intelligent design movement: the argument that nature exhibits evidence of design, beyond Darwinian randomness. It sparked a national debate on evolution, which continues to intensify across the country. From one end of the spectrum to the other, Darwin’s Black Box has established itself as the key intelligent design text — the one argument that must be addressed in order to determine whether Darwinian evolution is sufficient to explain life as we know it. In a major new Afterword for this edition, Behe explains that the complexity discovered by microbiologists has dramatically increased since the book was first published. That complexity is a continuing challenge to Darwinism, and evolutionists have had no success at explaining it. Darwin’s Black Box is more important today than ever.