The death of Darwinism coming to a school near you.

Darwinism has been exposed. I have many articles about how this charlatan has been revealed and that his theories such as mutations are totally unfounded. Mutations have never created another organ. I like those questions, they are thought provoking in using logic and reasoning.

I can answer these.

1) The design of nature isn't particularly intelligent. Species are constantly going extinct. Humans aren't even very well designed, our knees go out long before our lives run out and our teeth don't last.

If there is a designer... He is rather inept in my view.

2) Sure. Actually biologists have searched for signs of intelligence in biological system... they even did experiments to look for the mass of the human soul. These experiments failed.

3) Natural selection

4) Yes, of course.

5) Irreducible complexity is a religious term, not a scientific one. Ask your pastor.

6) It is evidence of evolution (common descent) particularly when combined with geological and DNA evidence.

7) No.

8) Yes.

9) This is a great question. By far the best question in this list. In any belief that I hold I ask myself what evidence would change my mind.

There are a great number of things that would change my mind (of course they would need to be tested and clear enough to counter all of the evolution that evolution is correct).

Of course, if God gave me an unmistakeable message... and then told me that He designed everything, that would do it. Heck, there is no reason why He can't just appear as a big face in the sky and tell us we have it wrong.

When I create something I leave a signature... my name. God is certainly smart enough to leave something unmistable, Bible Verse written in DNA would do.

A biological structure that really couldn't be explained from natural selection. It couldn't be one of these questionable cases that people argue over... it would have to be undeniably impossible. Or a Geographic structure that really couldn't be explained. Of course this type of evidence would have to be unmistakable enough to counter act all of the other evidence.

But then if God were real, there will not be cloudy evidence that could be arguable... it would be very clear and unmistakable to everyone. We are talking about an Intelligence here. The things that I build are very clearly designed (not like the biological structures we are arguing about).

10) Yes, we can.

For the record, I know very well the evidence for an Intelligent Designer. In my younger days I was very enthusiastic Christian training to be a pastor.

Then I went to college and heard the other side of the argument.

In my opinion, the Intelligent Design argument doesn't make very much sense when you honestly look at the evidence on both sides. That's my experience anyway.

Asking a question does not refute.

1) If nature, or some aspect of it, is intelligently designed, how can we tell?

By its lack of extinction, cf. the steam engine.

2)The search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) is a scientific research program that searches for signs of intelligence from distant space. Should biologists likewise search for signs of intelligence in biological systems?

No, biologists seek for signs of life.

3)How do we account for the complex information-rich patterns in biological systems?

Diversity.

4)Do any structures in the cell resemble machines designed by humans?

Yes.

5)What are irreducibly complex systems? Do such systems exist in biology? If so, are those systems evidence for design? If not, why not?

No, if they were irreducibly complex then design would be impossible.

6)Human designers reuse designs that work well. Life forms also repeat the use of certain structures (the camera eye, for example). Is this evidence for common descent, evolutionary convergence, common design, or a combination of these?

A snowflakes structure does not depend upon a designer.

7)In trying to understand biological systems, molecular biologists often need to “reverse engineer” them. Is this evidence that the systems were engineered to begin with?

No, it's an example of sophistry.

8)Do intelligent design theory and neo-Darwinian theory make different predictions?

Yes, ID predicts a priori a supernatural being whereas evolution is based upon empirical observation.

9)What evidence would convince you that intelligent design is true and neo-Darwinism is false?

Any shred of evidence, the merest strand, would be sufficient.

10)Can we determine whether an object is designed without identifying or knowing anything about its designer? For instance, can we identify an object as an ancient artifact without knowing anything about the civilization that produced it?

Yes, we can imagine all manner of things.

What would be most helpful is Philosophy of Science (one of Einstein's great attempts to change scientific thinking) so that we could see the limitations of science in its unquestioned assumptions/premises and in the interpretation of its conclusions.


I always liked the illustration of boys mowing a lawn and the answer that comes out for How many boys then will it take to cut 4 acres in 3 days? Answer: 3.6 boys.
And the answer is correct but needs to be made condign with reality by defining 'man-hours'.