Intelligent Design?

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”
–Charles Darwin, Origin of Species

With this statement, Charles Darwin provided a criterion by which his theory of evolution could be falsified. The logic was simple: since evolution is a gradual process in which slight modifications produce advantages for survival, it cannot produce complex structures in a short amount of time. It’s a step-by-step process which may gradually build up and modify complex structures, but it cannot produce them suddenly.

Darwin, meet Michael Behe, biochemical researcher and professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. Michale Behe claims to have shown exactly what Darwin claimed would destroy the theory of evolution, through a concept he calls “irreducible complexity.” In simple terms, this idea applies to any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part destroys the function of the entire system. An irreducibly complex system, then, requires each and every component to be in place before it will function.

As a simple example of irreducible complexity, Behe presents the humble mousetrap.

It contains five interdependent parts which allow it to catch mice: the wooden platform, the spring, the hammer (the bar which crushes the mouse against the wooden base), the holding bar, and a catch. Each of these components is absolutely essential for the function of the mousetrap. For instance, if you remove the catch, you cannot set the trap and it will never catch mice, no matter how long they may dance over the contraption. Remove the spring, and the hammer will flop uselessly back and forth-certainly not much of a threat to the little rodents. Of course, removal of the holding bar will ensure that the trap never catches anything because there will again be no way to arm the system.

Now, note what this implies: an irreducibly complex system cannot come about in a gradual manner. One cannot begin with a wooden platform and catch a few mice, then add a spring, catching a few more mice than before, etc. No, all the components must be in place before it functions at all. A step-by-step approach to constructing such a system will result in a useless system until all the components have been added. The system requires all the components to be added at the same time, in the right configuration, before it works at all.

(From Idea Center)

And the rebuttal:

Charles Johnson supports the Catholic Church now because it supports Evolution

As a Catholic I’m happy that Charles approves my version of Christianity. He is the one that decides which faith is correct. Thanks Charles!

/Sarc

Vatican Evolution Congress Excludes Creationism, Intelligent Design

The Vatican is sponsoring an international conference on the evolution debate, and “intelligent design” creationists like the Discovery Institute are not invited.

VATICAN CITY (CNS) — Speakers invited to attend a Vatican-sponsored congress on the evolution debate will not include proponents of creationism and intelligent design, organizers said.

The Pontifical Council for Culture, Rome’s Pontifical Gregorian University and the University of Notre Dame in Indiana are organizing an international conference in Rome March 3-7 as one of a series of events marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin’s “The Origin of Species.”

Jesuit Father Marc Leclerc, a philosophy professor at the Gregorian, told Catholic News Service Sept. 16 that organizers “wanted to create a conference that was strictly scientific” and that discussed rational philosophy and theology along with the latest scientific discoveries.

He said arguments “that cannot be critically defined as being science, or philosophy or theology did not seem feasible to include in a dialogue at this level and, therefore, for this reason we did not think to invite” supporters of creationism and intelligent design.

I’m glad to see that the Catholic Church has taken a stand against promoting creationism as science. For more details: The Panda’s Thumb.

Is Charles a sciende nut now?

Charles continues his Jihad on Intelligent Design

This is an issue I really don’t care about. However I must speak up when I see hypocrisy. Charles is science freak. LGF is turning a a science website. He doesn’t like the fact in the UK, people are questioning Darwinism. Charles believes the real world should be as his site/cult, silence those who don’t agree.

Creationism Gaining Strength in Britain

he director of education at Britain’s Royal Society, Professor Michael Reiss, wants to open up British science classes to discussion of creationism.

He says that in his experience it is more effective to include discussion about creationism alongside scientific theories such as the Big Bang and evolution.

“An increasing percentage of children in the UK come from families that do not accept the scientific version of the history of the universe and the evolution of species.

“What are we to do with those children? My experience after having tried to teach biology for 20 years is if one simply gives the impression that such children are wrong, then they are not likely to learn much about the science that one really wants them to learn.”

The BBC will never say it outright, but that “increasing percentage” of children who won’t accept evolution are mostly from Muslim families; here’s an article at the Guardian by writer Usama Hasan, who argues that modern Muslims’ view of evolution must change.

Professor Richard Dawkins recently said that most Muslims were creationists, and their children are taught that the theory of evolution is wrong, which causes a huge problem in schools.

He’s largely correct, and the Muslim world desperately needs to debate the matter properly without fear, since science can neither prove nor disprove God. Whereas the Christian world, where Charles Darwin first proposed his thesis, has had a century and a half to come to terms with the theory of evolution, it has only begun to be taught rather recently in the Muslim world, where faith and religious practice is still relatively strong.

No wonder then that the theory is opposed by some religious elements, especially those that are ignorant of science. Snazzy websites, videos and books produced by fundamentalist Muslim “creationists” such as those at http://www.harunyahya.com, are obscuring clear scientific thinking.

Creation or evolution? Many believers in God have no problem with an obvious solution: that God created man via evolution. Here is some explanation of this view from a Muslim perspective.

Here we have a minister of the Church of England arguing for allowing creationism in schools, and a Muslim free thinker arguing against it.

Now, that’s whack.

Charles I could care less it’s whack to you. People have a right to hear other views and theories.Charles, start a science blog.