Changes

[[Image:Intelligent design.jpg‎|alt= Intelligent design|thumbnail|300px|right|Intelligent design theorists contend that the core feature of life consists of information processing systems that cannot be fully explained as being the result of unintelligent causes alone. When [[evolution|evolutionist]] [[Richard Dawkins]] was young, he recognized that the complexity of life indicates a designer.]]

[[Image:Intelligent design.jpg‎|alt= Intelligent design|thumbnail|300px|right|Intelligent design theorists contend that the core feature of life consists of information processing systems that cannot be fully explained as being the result of unintelligent causes alone. When [[evolution]]ist [[Richard Dawkins]] was young, he recognized that the complexity of life indicates a designer.]]

'''Intelligent design''' '''(ID)''' is the empirically testable<ref>"Dembski and Wells argue calmly and convincingly that intelligent design theory is empirically testable (in spite of Darwinists' shrill protests to the contrary) by indicating precisely what it would take to refute the theory, namely a clear demonstration that systems exhibiting [[irreducible complexity]] with specified complexity can in fact arise spontaneously by purely material processes" source: [http://www.amazon.com/The-Design-Life-Discovering-Intelligence/dp/0980021308 The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence in Biological Systems - Amazon page]</ref> theory that the natural world shows signs of having been designed by a purposeful, intelligent cause.<ref>

'''Intelligent design''' '''(ID)''' is the empirically testable<ref>"Dembski and Wells argue calmly and convincingly that intelligent design theory is empirically testable (in spite of Darwinists' shrill protests to the contrary) by indicating precisely what it would take to refute the theory, namely a clear demonstration that systems exhibiting [[irreducible complexity]] with specified complexity can in fact arise spontaneously by purely material processes" source: [http://www.amazon.com/The-Design-Life-Discovering-Intelligence/dp/0980021308 The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence in Biological Systems - Amazon page]</ref> theory that the natural world shows signs of having been designed by a purposeful, intelligent cause.<ref>

An inference that certain biological information may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences. [http://www.uncommondescent.com/id-defined/ ID Defined]</ref> As [[Jonathan Wells]] wrote, "ID ... asserts only that some features of living things are better explained by an intelligent cause than by unguided processes." <ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/11/wired_science_one_long_bluff028441.html</ref> Wells, among others, uses ID to rebut the [[evolution|Darwinian]] assertion that the features of living things are "inexplicable on the theory of [[creation]]" but fully explicable as products of unguided natural forces.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9151</ref>

An inference that certain biological information may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences. [http://www.uncommondescent.com/id-defined/ ID Defined]</ref> As [[Jonathan Wells]] wrote, "ID ... asserts only that some features of living things are better explained by an intelligent cause than by unguided processes." <ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/11/wired_science_one_long_bluff028441.html</ref> Wells, among others, uses ID to rebut the [[evolution|Darwinian]] assertion that the features of living things are "inexplicable on the theory of [[creation]]" but fully explicable as products of unguided natural forces.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/9151</ref>

The central idea of Intelligent Design theory is that [[design]] is empirically detectable, just as the detectability of design in man-made objects is straightforward, non-controversial,  and often intuitive (see: [[design detection]]).  With respect to the origin and development of cosmological and biological systems, Intelligent Design theory holds that the same principles provide a logical inference of design in nature.  That is, without necessarily "proving" actual intelligent design in nature, the observable material evidence provides a reasonable basis from which to infer design, and such an inference supports a legitimate scientific hypothesis of ''intelligent'' design.  As such, Intelligent Design theory is a scientific disagreement with the core claim of materialistic theories of [[evolution|evolution]] such as chemical and Darwinian evolution <ref>Darwinian Evolution: A materialistic theory of the history of the diversification of organisms from common ancestors through a process of descent with modification. The theory postulates that evolutionary change is the result of material causes [i.e., unintelligent causes due to the interactions of matter, energy, and the forces of nature], driven primarily by random variation and natural selection.  The forces include gravity, the electromagnetic force and the weak and strong nuclear forces that define the structure of atoms. With respect to explaining the cosmos, the laws of chemistry and physics such as the laws of motion and thermodynamics dictate that material causes operate in generally periodic or regular patterns at best, and in entropy-increasing randomness at worst. ''See'', "Thirty-eight Nobel Laureates, ''Nobel Laureates Initiative,'' (The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, September 9, 2005), stressing to Kansas State Board of Education: “[E]volution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.”</ref> that the design exhibited in our universe is merely ''apparent'' design, i.e., ''unintelligent'' design caused by unguided, purposeless, natural forces of physics and chemistry alone.<ref> As used in this article, "materialism" is used synonymously with "naturalism". Naturalism is a philosophical doctrine that material causes alone are adequate to account for all natural phenomena and that teleological (design) conceptions of nature are invalid.</ref>

The central idea of Intelligent Design theory is that [[design]] is empirically detectable, just as the detectability of design in man-made objects is straightforward, non-controversial,  and often intuitive (see: [[design detection]]).  With respect to the origin and development of cosmological and biological systems, Intelligent Design theory holds that the same principles provide a logical inference of design in nature.  That is, without necessarily "proving" actual intelligent design in nature, the observable material evidence provides a reasonable basis from which to infer design, and such an inference supports a legitimate scientific hypothesis of ''intelligent'' design.  As such, Intelligent Design theory is a scientific disagreement with the core claim of materialistic theories of [[evolution]] such as chemical and Darwinian evolution <ref>Darwinian Evolution: A materialistic theory of the history of the diversification of organisms from common ancestors through a process of descent with modification. The theory postulates that evolutionary change is the result of material causes [i.e., unintelligent causes due to the interactions of matter, energy, and the forces of nature], driven primarily by random variation and natural selection.  The forces include gravity, the electromagnetic force and the weak and strong nuclear forces that define the structure of atoms. With respect to explaining the cosmos, the laws of chemistry and physics such as the laws of motion and thermodynamics dictate that material causes operate in generally periodic or regular patterns at best, and in entropy-increasing randomness at worst. ''See'', "Thirty-eight Nobel Laureates, ''Nobel Laureates Initiative,'' (The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, September 9, 2005), stressing to Kansas State Board of Education: “[E]volution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.”</ref> that the design exhibited in our universe is merely ''apparent'' design, i.e., ''unintelligent'' design caused by unguided, purposeless, natural forces of physics and chemistry alone.<ref>As used in this article, "materialism" is used synonymously with "naturalism". Naturalism is a philosophical doctrine that material causes alone are adequate to account for all natural phenomena and that teleological (design) conceptions of nature are invalid.</ref>

In a broader sense, Intelligent Design is simply the science of design detection -- how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose. Design detection is used in a number of scientific fields, including anthropology, archeology, forensic sciences, cryptanalysis and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence ([[SETI|'''SETI''']]). An inference that certain cosmological and biological features of the natural world may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences.<ref>For example, Stephen C. Meyer, Senior Fellow of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, notes at [http://www.discovery.org/a/1671 A Note to Teachers

In a broader sense, Intelligent Design is simply the science of design detection—how to recognize patterns arranged by an intelligent cause for a purpose. Design detection is used in a number of scientific fields, including anthropology, archeology, forensic sciences, cryptanalysis and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence ('''[[SETI]]'''). An inference that certain cosmological and biological features of the natural world may be the product of an intelligent cause can be tested or evaluated in the same manner as scientists daily test for design in other sciences.<ref>For example, Stephen C. Meyer, Senior Fellow of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, notes at [http://www.discovery.org/a/1671 A Note to Teachers Stephen C. Meyer and Mark Hartwig, Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins May 1, 1993], the problem with limiting explanations to only "natural" causes: "Archaeologists routinely distinguish manufactured objects (e.g., arrowheads, potsherds) from natural ones (e.g., stones), even when the differences between them are very subtle. These manufactured objects then become important clues in reconstructing past ways of life. But if we arbitrarily assert that science explains solely by reference to natural laws, if archaeologists are prohibited from invoking an intelligent manufacturer, the whole archaeological enterprise comes to a grinding halt."</ref>

Stephen C. Meyer and Mark Hartwig, Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins

May 1, 1993], the problem with limiting explanations to only "natural" causes: "Archaeologists routinely distinguish manufactured objects (e.g., arrowheads, potsherds) from natural ones (e.g., stones), even when the differences between them are very subtle. These manufactured objects then become important clues in reconstructing past ways of life. But if we arbitrarily assert that science explains solely by reference to natural laws, if archaeologists are prohibited from invoking an intelligent manufacturer, the whole archaeological enterprise comes to a grinding halt."</ref>

Intelligent Design theory, like all theories of origins, is scientifically and religiously controversial.  All theories of origins are scientifically controversial because they often amount to subjective historical narratives that seek to explain unobserved and unobservable singular past events that occurred many years ago and that cannot be adequately tested in the laboratory.  They are religiously controversial because all religions, including non-theistic religions, depend on a particular origins narrative. Intelligent Design proponents believe institutions of science, including government agencies, public schools and universities, should strive for objectivity and academic freedom in facilitating origins teaching and research. Objectivity in the evaluation and interpretation of material evidence ensures that all evidence-based explanations for natural phenomena can be considered fairly on their respective merits, regardless of their ultimate metaphysical or religious implications. Institutions of science should promote objectivity and academic freedom, especially where minority viewpoints challenge scientific orthodoxy.

Intelligent Design theory, like all theories of origins, is scientifically and religiously controversial.  All theories of origins are scientifically controversial because they often amount to subjective historical narratives that seek to explain unobserved and unobservable singular past events that occurred many years ago and that cannot be adequately tested in the laboratory.  They are religiously controversial because all religions, including non-theistic religions, depend on a particular origins narrative. Intelligent Design proponents believe institutions of science, including government agencies, public schools and universities, should strive for objectivity and academic freedom in facilitating origins teaching and research. Objectivity in the evaluation and interpretation of material evidence ensures that all evidence-based explanations for natural phenomena can be considered fairly on their respective merits, regardless of their ultimate metaphysical or religious implications. Institutions of science should promote objectivity and academic freedom, especially where minority viewpoints challenge scientific orthodoxy.

== Intelligent Design, Evolution, and the Nature of Origins Science ==

== Intelligent Design, Evolution, and the Nature of Origins Science ==

'''[[Origins science]]''' is the scientific inquiry about biological and cosmological origins.<ref> ''See'', '''Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science''', definition of Origins Science, '''Intelligent Design Network''' http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Statement_of_Objectives_Feb_12_07.pdf</ref>  Scientists investigating such origins seek to propose explanations for the direct cause of unobserved events and processes that occurred in the very remote past that can not be duplicated under presently observable conditions and that are not amenable to experimental confirmation.  Explanations can only be inferred from the evidence.  Intelligent design theorists argue that the evidence naturally leads to an inference of design.  Darwinists argue unguided purposeless causes ''despite'' the clear evidence of design.  Because no explanation can be tested by experimental methods, the historical nature of origins science can only lead to inferences, and the question is simply which inference is most reasonable.   

'''[[Origins science]]''' is the scientific inquiry about biological and cosmological origins.<ref>''See'', '''Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science''', definition of Origins Science, '''Intelligent Design Network''' http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Statement_of_Objectives_Feb_12_07.pdf</ref>  Scientists investigating such origins seek to propose explanations for the direct cause of unobserved events and processes that occurred in the very remote past that can not be duplicated under presently observable conditions and that are not amenable to experimental confirmation.  Explanations can only be inferred from the evidence.  Intelligent design theorists argue that the evidence naturally leads to an inference of design.  Darwinists argue unguided purposeless causes ''despite'' the clear evidence of design.  Because no explanation can be tested by experimental methods, the historical nature of origins science can only lead to inferences, and the question is simply which inference is most reasonable.   

[[Image:Ernst_Mayr.jpg|thumb|150px|left|[[Ernst Mayr]]]]

[[Image:Ernst_Mayr.jpg|thumb|150px|left|[[Ernst Mayr]]]]

Preeminent 20th century Darwinist [[Ernst Mayr]], billed as “one of the great shining figures of evolutionary biology” <ref>Ernst Mayr, ''What Evolution Is'' (New York: Basic Books, 2001); back cover, quote attributed to John Maynard Smith.</ref> correctly noted in his book entitled ''What Evolution Is'':

Preeminent 20th century Darwinist [[Ernst Mayr]], billed as “one of the great shining figures of evolutionary biology” <ref>Ernst Mayr, ''What Evolution Is'' (New York: Basic Books, 2001); back cover, quote attributed to John Maynard Smith.</ref> correctly noted in his book entitled ''What Evolution Is'':

Mayr's statement does not define "evolution", but his point is valid.<ref>"Evolution" is in quotes because one of the problems faced in debating "evolution" is the lack of a precise definition.  If "evolution" is used to mean "micro-evolution" (minor changes like finch beak variation observed within some species), then "evolution" is uncontroversial.  However, if (as Mayr intends, but does not state) by "evolution" is meant "unguided, purposeless processes to produce new and beneficial changes in living systems", then Mayr is correct -- "evolution" is not experimentally confirmable, and, exactly like Intelligent Design, can only be inferred from observations.</ref> More objectively, his statement should be that origins (whether cosmological or biological) are due to a historical process that cannot be proven . . . but must be inferred from observations. Thus the methods used to discern the cause of historical events and processes differ from those of inductive, experimental science, and inferences based on observations should not be limited only to inferences of unintelligent causation.  As with other historical sciences like archeology, historical geology, forensics and cryptanalysis, origins science asks different kinds of questions and uses different methods than do inductive sciences. The inductive sciences, on the one hand, ask questions about how the natural world generally operates based on direct experimental observation. The historical sciences, on the other hand, use abductive reasoning that asks how certain or probable observable phenomena came to be, the answer to which often cannot be discovered through direct observation. Dr. [[Stephen C. Meyer]] fully develops this line of thought.

Mayr's statement does not define "evolution", but his point is valid.<ref>"Evolution" is in quotes because one of the problems faced in debating "evolution" is the lack of a precise definition.  If "evolution" is used to mean "micro-evolution" (minor changes like finch beak variation observed within some species), then "evolution" is uncontroversial.  However, if (as Mayr intends, but does not state) by "evolution" is meant "unguided, purposeless processes to produce new and beneficial changes in living systems", then Mayr is correct -- "evolution" is not experimentally confirmable, and, exactly like Intelligent Design, can only be inferred from observations.</ref> More objectively, his statement should be that origins (whether cosmological or biological) are due to a historical process that cannot be proven . . . but must be inferred from observations. Thus the methods used to discern the cause of historical events and processes differ from those of inductive, experimental science, and inferences based on observations should not be limited only to inferences of unintelligent causation.  As with other historical sciences like archeology, historical geology, forensics and cryptanalysis, origins science asks different kinds of questions and uses different methods than do inductive sciences. The inductive sciences, on the one hand, ask questions about how the natural world generally operates based on direct experimental observation. The historical sciences, on the other hand, use abductive reasoning that asks how certain or probable observable phenomena came to be, the answer to which often cannot be discovered through direct observation. Dr. [[Stephen C. Meyer]] fully develops this line of thought.

The distinction between inductive and historical sciences is not an idea inspired by intelligent design theory. The [[National Academy of Sciences|'''National Academy of Sciences''']] (NAS) makes the same distinction to defend "evolution" as science.<ref>As noted above, with respect to Mayr's statement, "evolution" is in quotes here again because the NAS fails to use the term with a precise meaning.  If "evolution" is used to mean "micro-evolution" (the minor change like finch beak variation, usually inconsequential, but observed within some species), then of course "evolution" is scientific and verifiable by experimentation.  However, if by "evolution" is meant "unguided, purposeless processes to produce new and beneficial changes in living systems", then "evolution" is not experimentally confirmable, as the NAS notes.  However, as the NAS notes, such lack of being able to be experimentally confirmed does not remove a hypothesis from the realm of science (otherwise, as the NAS confirms, "evolution" would not be science).</ref> In its publication ''Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science'' <ref>''Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science'' Washington DC, National Academy Press, 1998), p. 55.</ref>, the NAS responds to the question, "How can evolution be scientific when no one was there to see it happen?":

The distinction between inductive and historical sciences is not an idea inspired by intelligent design theory. The '''[[National Academy of Sciences]]''' (NAS) makes the same distinction to defend "evolution" as science.<ref>As noted above, with respect to Mayr's statement, "evolution" is in quotes here again because the NAS fails to use the term with a precise meaning.  If "evolution" is used to mean "micro-evolution" (the minor change like finch beak variation, usually inconsequential, but observed within some species), then of course "evolution" is scientific and verifiable by experimentation.  However, if by "evolution" is meant "unguided, purposeless processes to produce new and beneficial changes in living systems", then "evolution" is not experimentally confirmable, as the NAS notes.  However, as the NAS notes, such lack of being able to be experimentally confirmed does not remove a hypothesis from the realm of science (otherwise, as the NAS confirms, "evolution" would not be science).</ref> In its publication ''Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science'',<ref>''Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science'' Washington DC, National Academy Press, 1998), p. 55.</ref> the NAS responds to the question, "How can evolution be scientific when no one was there to see it happen?":

  <blockquote>

  <blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

Intelligent design theorists agree; one must not take a “narrow view” of science, such that certain disciplines like archeology, the [[SETI|'''SETI''']] project, forensics, and intelligent design are removed from the realm of science.  Such disciplines propose hypotheses, and the testing of these hypotheses is often only effective by proposing competing hypotheses and objectively analyzing the evidence to determine which hypothesis correlates best with the evidence. As '''Carol Cleland''' elaborates in her paper entitled ''Historical Science, Experimental Science and the Scientific Method'', in actual practice historical researchers tend to search for “positive evidence—a smoking gun.”  <ref>Carol Cleland, ''Historical Science, Experimental Science and the Scientific Method'' (Geology, November 2001, Vol. 29, No. 11), pp. 987-990.</ref> Ms. Cleland explores the necessary role of hypothesis testing for scientific disciplines not amenable to classical experimental testing. Hypothesis testing by formulating multiple competing hypotheses is essential in the context of historical sciences, such as cosmology, geology, and biogenesis. According to Cleland, “A smoking gun is a trace that picks out one of the competing hypotheses as providing a better causal explanation for the currently available traces than the other.” <ref>Carol Cleland, ''Historical Science, Experimental Science and the Scientific Method'' (Geology, November 2001, Vol. 29, No. 11) p. 988.</ref>

Intelligent design theorists agree; one must not take a “narrow view” of science, such that certain disciplines like archeology, the '''[[SETI]]''' project, forensics, and intelligent design are removed from the realm of science.  Such disciplines propose hypotheses, and the testing of these hypotheses is often only effective by proposing competing hypotheses and objectively analyzing the evidence to determine which hypothesis correlates best with the evidence. As '''Carol Cleland''' elaborates in her paper entitled ''Historical Science, Experimental Science and the Scientific Method'', in actual practice historical researchers tend to search for “positive evidence—a smoking gun.”  <ref>Carol Cleland, ''Historical Science, Experimental Science and the Scientific Method'' (Geology, November 2001, Vol. 29, No. 11), pp. 987-990.</ref> Ms. Cleland explores the necessary role of hypothesis testing for scientific disciplines not amenable to classical experimental testing. Hypothesis testing by formulating multiple competing hypotheses is essential in the context of historical sciences, such as cosmology, geology, and biogenesis. According to Cleland, “A smoking gun is a trace that picks out one of the competing hypotheses as providing a better causal explanation for the currently available traces than the other.” <ref>Carol Cleland, ''Historical Science, Experimental Science and the Scientific Method'' (Geology, November 2001, Vol. 29, No. 11) p. 988.</ref>

== Methods of Intelligent Design Detection ==

== Methods of Intelligent Design Detection ==

''See also:'' [[Irreducible complexity]] and [[Argument from beauty]]

''See also:'' [[Irreducible complexity]] and [[Argument from beauty]]

[[File:Fire-investigator.jpg|275px|right|thumbnail|Design detection is used in a variety of [[science|sciences]] including [[forensic]] science that investigates the cause of a death or fire.]]

[[File:Fire-investigator.jpg|275px|right|thumbnail|Design detection is used in a variety of [[science]]s including [[forensic]] science that investigates the cause of a death or fire.]]

Design detection asks whether an effect or pattern that arose unobserved in the past is due to intelligent or unintelligent material causes.  Is the pattern or effect a design or just an occurrence?

Design detection asks whether an effect or pattern that arose unobserved in the past is due to intelligent or unintelligent material causes.  Is the pattern or effect a design or just an occurrence?

''See also:'' [[Anthropic principle]]

''See also:'' [[Anthropic principle]]

There is a strong body of evidence for a Designer that comes from the fine-tuning of the universal constants and the solar system.<ref>[http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life The universe is finely tuned for life] by Jonathan Sarfati</ref>

There is a strong body of evidence for a Designer that comes from the fine-tuning of the universal constants and the solar system.<ref name="creation.com">[http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life The universe is finely tuned for life] by Jonathan Sarfati</ref>

Former [[Atheism|atheist]] Sir [[Fred Hoyle]] states, "commonsense interpretation of the facts is that a super-intelligence has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces in nature."<ref>[http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life The universe is finely tuned for life] by Jonathan Sarfati</ref>

Former [[Atheism|atheist]] Sir [[Fred Hoyle]] states, "commonsense interpretation of the facts is that a super-intelligence has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces in nature."<ref name="creation.com"/>

==Examples of Intelligent Design Theory Used in Science==

==Examples of Intelligent Design Theory Used in Science==

[[The Privileged Planet]] is an intelligent design theory documentary which argues that the earth contains a rare and finely-tuned array of factors which makes earth suitable for complex life.<ref>[http://www.privilegedplanet.com/ The Privileged Planet documentary website]</ref>

[[The Privileged Planet]] is an intelligent design theory documentary which argues that the earth contains a rare and finely-tuned array of factors which makes earth suitable for complex life.<ref>[http://www.privilegedplanet.com/ The Privileged Planet documentary website]</ref>

The proposal that first life came about through natural processes has not fared well in recent times. The prominent [[origin of life]] researcher [[Stanley Miller]] said the origin of life problem was more difficult than he or anyone else had imagined.<ref>[http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_4/abiogenesis.html Why Abiogenesis is impossible]</ref> Due to the necessity of an intelligent agent and the natural forces that a naturalistic origin of life faces, it is impossible for life to have arisen naturally (see: [http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]).<ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]</ref> <ref>[http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_4/abiogenesis.html Why Abiogenesis is impossible]</ref>

The proposal that first life came about through natural processes has not fared well in recent times. The prominent [[origin of life]] researcher [[Stanley Miller]] said the origin of life problem was more difficult than he or anyone else had imagined.<ref name="Why Abiogenesis is impossible">[http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_4/abiogenesis.html Why Abiogenesis is impossible]</ref> Due to the necessity of an intelligent agent and the natural forces that a naturalistic origin of life faces, it is impossible for life to have arisen naturally (see: [http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]).<ref name="Why Abiogenesis is impossible"/><ref>[http://creation.com/origin-of-life Origin of life]</ref>

== Religious Implications of Origins Science ==

== Religious Implications of Origins Science ==

Any theory of origins unavoidably impacts religion.<ref>One should not make the mistake of equating "religion" with only traditional theistic religions like [[Christianity]], [[Judaism]], or [[Islam]].  As used herein the term is used as defined in the Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science: Religion: A broad range of theistic and non-theistic religions and religious belief systems.</ref> As stated in Article II.C of the '''Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science''':<ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Statement_of_Objectives_Feb_12_07.pdf</ref>

Any theory of origins unavoidably impacts religion.<ref>One should not make the mistake of equating "religion" with only traditional theistic religions like [[Christianity]], [[Judaism]], or [[Islam]].  As used herein the term is used as defined in the Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science: Religion: A broad range of theistic and non-theistic religions and religious belief systems.</ref> As stated in Article II.C of the '''Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science''':<ref name="intelligentdesignnetwork.org">http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Statement_of_Objectives_Feb_12_07.pdf</ref>

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

Implications of scientific explanations of origins unavoidably impact religion, ethics, morality, government and politics.  The implications of materialistic explanations (such as Darwinism) of origins support the central tenets of non-theistic religions<ref>Non-theistic religions are religions and belief systems that presuppose that no God intervenes in the natural world and that material causes, such as unguided evolutionary change, are adequate to explain natural phenomena.  Non-theistic religions include [[atheism]], [[Secular Humanism]], and [[Scientism]], as well as some forms of [[Buddhism]] and other eastern religions.  By way of example, the Humanist Manifesto I sets forth the first two "affirmations" of religious humanism as "FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created; and, SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process." Thus, Darwinism supports the central tenets of a religious belief.</ref>, while the implications of teleological<ref>Teleological: Exhibiting or relating to design or purpose, especially in nature. ''See'', Merriam-Webster Online</ref> explanations (such as Intelligent Design) support the central tenets of theistic religions. Both theistic and non-theistic religions and worldviews address questions of ethics, morality, government and politics.<ref>ibid, Article II.C</ref>

Implications of scientific explanations of origins unavoidably impact religion, ethics, morality, government and politics.  The implications of materialistic explanations (such as Darwinism) of origins support the central tenets of non-theistic religions,<ref>Non-theistic religions are religions and belief systems that presuppose that no God intervenes in the natural world and that material causes, such as unguided evolutionary change, are adequate to explain natural phenomena.  Non-theistic religions include [[atheism]], [[Secular Humanism]], and [[Scientism]], as well as some forms of [[Buddhism]] and other eastern religions.  By way of example, the Humanist Manifesto I sets forth the first two "affirmations" of religious humanism as "FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created; and, SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process." Thus, Darwinism supports the central tenets of a religious belief.</ref> while the implications of teleological<ref>Teleological: Exhibiting or relating to design or purpose, especially in nature. ''See'', Merriam-Webster Online</ref> explanations (such as Intelligent Design) support the central tenets of theistic religions. Both theistic and non-theistic religions and worldviews address questions of ethics, morality, government and politics.<ref>ibid, Article II.C</ref>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

[[Image:Atheism.jpg|thumb|right|195px|[[Paul-Henri Thiry]], Baron d'Holbach (1723 - 1789) was an early advocate of [[atheism]] in [[Europe]].]]

[[Image:Atheism.jpg|thumb|right|195px|[[Paul-Henri Thiry]], Baron d'Holbach (1723 - 1789) was an early advocate of [[atheism]] in [[Europe]].]]

This is because, as stated in Article II.B. of the '''Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science''':

This is because, as stated in Article II.B. of the '''Statement of Objectives Regarding Origins Science''':

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

The adequacy of scientific explanations of origins depends on an analysis of competing possibilities. Origins explanations use a form of '''abductive'''<ref>Abduction, or abductive reasoning, is the process of reasoning to the best explanations. In other words, it is the reasoning process that starts from a set of facts and derives their most likely explanations.  See, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning </ref> reasoning that produces competing Historical Hypotheses, that lead to an inference to the best current explanation rather than to an explanation that is logically compelled by experimental confirmation. Due to inherent limitations on the experimental validation of historical hypotheses, testing requires rigorous competition between alternative hypotheses so that their relative strengths and plausibilities may be compared. While competition among multiple hypotheses decreases subjectivity, it may nevertheless result in no adequate current explanation.<ref>ibid, Article II.B</ref>

The adequacy of scientific explanations of origins depends on an analysis of competing possibilities. Origins explanations use a form of '''abductive'''<ref>Abduction, or abductive reasoning, is the process of reasoning to the best explanations. In other words, it is the reasoning process that starts from a set of facts and derives their most likely explanations.  See, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning</ref> reasoning that produces competing Historical Hypotheses, that lead to an inference to the best current explanation rather than to an explanation that is logically compelled by experimental confirmation. Due to inherent limitations on the experimental validation of historical hypotheses, testing requires rigorous competition between alternative hypotheses so that their relative strengths and plausibilities may be compared. While competition among multiple hypotheses decreases subjectivity, it may nevertheless result in no adequate current explanation.<ref>ibid, Article II.B</ref>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

==Objections to Intelligent Design==

==Objections to Intelligent Design==

===Creationist Objections to Intelligent Design===

===Creationist Objections to Intelligent Design===

Many Biblical creationists and other theists object to Intelligent Design as failing to identify the alleged designer. This objection is expressed well by Georgia Purdom, Ph.D. of [[Answers in Genesis|'''Answers in Genesis''']] in an article entitled '''''Does the Identity of the Creator Really Matter?'''''  Dr. Purdom sums up the major objection:

Many Biblical creationists and other theists object to Intelligent Design as failing to identify the alleged designer. This objection is expressed well by Georgia Purdom, Ph.D. of '''[[Answers in Genesis]]''' in an article entitled '''''Does the Identity of the Creator Really Matter?'''''  Dr. Purdom sums up the major objection:

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

Further, it appears that Dr. Weiland's concern that "[a]cceptance of ID thinking en masse could just as easily lead to New-Age or Hindu-like notions of creation, as well as weird alien sci-fi notions" is unfounded.  Certainly some who are honestly convinced of true intelligent design might entertain "sci-fi notions," but the evidence supports the opposite--i.e., those convinced of design are more likely to entertain thoughts of a supernatural God.  Like Aristotle of ancient Greece, those who reasonably and honestly are convinced of true design in nature are more likely to follow the pattern Dr. Pordum highlighted from Romans 1:18-20.  That is, the creation speaks to a supernatural, infinite, eternal creator.

Further, it appears that Dr. Weiland's concern that "[a]cceptance of ID thinking en masse could just as easily lead to New-Age or Hindu-like notions of creation, as well as weird alien sci-fi notions" is unfounded.  Certainly some who are honestly convinced of true intelligent design might entertain "sci-fi notions," but the evidence supports the opposite—i.e., those convinced of design are more likely to entertain thoughts of a supernatural God.  Like Aristotle of ancient Greece, those who reasonably and honestly are convinced of true design in nature are more likely to follow the pattern Dr. Pordum highlighted from Romans 1:18-20.  That is, the creation speaks to a supernatural, infinite, eternal creator.

Take the example of former atheist Anthony Flew, as discussed by intelligent design theorist Phillip E. Johnson, in an article entitled '''''Intelligent Design in Biology: the Current Situation and Future Prospects'''''.  First Johnson reiterates:

Take the example of former atheist Anthony Flew, as discussed by intelligent design theorist Phillip E. Johnson, in an article entitled '''''Intelligent Design in Biology: the Current Situation and Future Prospects'''''.  First Johnson reiterates:

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

The goal of the Intelligent Design Movement is to achieve an open philosophy of science that permits consideration of any explanations toward which the evidence may be pointing.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/3914</ref>

The goal of the Intelligent Design Movement is to achieve an open philosophy of science that permits consideration of any explanations toward which the evidence may be pointing.<ref name="discovery.org">http://www.discovery.org/a/3914</ref>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

Although as yet Flew does not adhere to Christianity or any other creedal faith, he has taken a giant step in that direction. In an article in the London Independent for December 27, 2004, an Oxford University theologian wrote: “What kind of God could it [i.e. Flew’s designer] refer to? One who created the universe–elementary particles, strong and weak forces, atoms and molecules, yet, for example, has no relation to the emergence of a clever humanity? Or could it be a God who was intelligent enough to create galaxies, and amazingly intricate systems like DNA, yet not intelligent enough to communicate with humankind? Although Flew does not believe in revelation, and may not feel that the Book of Genesis provides a useful account of creation, he does not seem to have quite this kind of minimalist God in mind either. In fact when pressed as to whether his ‘First Cause’ embraced omniscience, Flew admits that a First Cause, if there is one, has clearly produced everything that is going on, and this implies creation ‘in the beginning.’”<ref>http://www.discovery.org/a/3914</ref>

Although as yet Flew does not adhere to Christianity or any other creedal faith, he has taken a giant step in that direction. In an article in the London Independent for December 27, 2004, an Oxford University theologian wrote: “What kind of God could it [i.e. Flew’s designer] refer to? One who created the universe–elementary particles, strong and weak forces, atoms and molecules, yet, for example, has no relation to the emergence of a clever humanity? Or could it be a God who was intelligent enough to create galaxies, and amazingly intricate systems like DNA, yet not intelligent enough to communicate with humankind? Although Flew does not believe in revelation, and may not feel that the Book of Genesis provides a useful account of creation, he does not seem to have quite this kind of minimalist God in mind either. In fact when pressed as to whether his ‘First Cause’ embraced omniscience, Flew admits that a First Cause, if there is one, has clearly produced everything that is going on, and this implies creation ‘in the beginning.’”<ref name="discovery.org"/>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

Plato and Aristotle both argued that nature is ''teleological'', a term that comes from the Greek ''telos'' meaning "directed by goal or purpose".  In other words, the evidence of nature leads logically to the idea that behind the purely natural is some kind of rational, non-natural order, something Plato referred to as "Form" and which Aristotle referred to as "Idea".  Both were led to their conclusions by the commonsense notion that if the world really did consist of chance configurations of atoms, then knowledge would be impossible. (See Nancy Pearcey, ''Total Truth'', Appendix 3, p. 390.)<ref>Nancy R. Pearcey, ''Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity'' (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004)(http://www.amazon.com/Total-Truth-Liberating-Christianity-Captivity/dp/1581347464/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195005366&sr=1-1)</ref><br /><br />

Plato and Aristotle both argued that nature is ''teleological'', a term that comes from the Greek ''telos'' meaning "directed by goal or purpose".  In other words, the evidence of nature leads logically to the idea that behind the purely natural is some kind of rational, non-natural order, something Plato referred to as "Form" and which Aristotle referred to as "Idea".  Both were led to their conclusions by the commonsense notion that if the world really did consist of chance configurations of atoms, then knowledge would be impossible. (See Nancy Pearcey, ''Total Truth'', Appendix 3, p.&nbsp;390.)<ref>Nancy R. Pearcey, ''Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity'' (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2004)(http://www.amazon.com/Total-Truth-Liberating-Christianity-Captivity/dp/1581347464/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1195005366&sr=1-1)</ref>

 

 

[[Image:Pearcey.jpg|thumb|150px|left|Nancy Pearcey]]

[[Image:Pearcey.jpg|thumb|150px|left|Nancy Pearcey]]

Modern intelligent design theory is simply a response to the resurgence of dominant materialistic thought, primarily as expressed by institutions of science such as universities and various academies of science.  As '''Nancy Pearcey''' states: "By tracing the debate over Darwinism all the way back to [[Epicurus]] (a Greek materialist) we can place the theory in a much larger context.  Darwinism was not entirely new, invented out of whole cloth."  Likewise, the modern intelligent design movement can be placed in a larger context as a challenge to modern materialistic thought as enforced in modern science.<br /><br />

Modern intelligent design theory is simply a response to the resurgence of dominant materialistic thought, primarily as expressed by institutions of science such as universities and various academies of science.  As '''Nancy Pearcey''' states: "By tracing the debate over Darwinism all the way back to [[Epicurus]] (a Greek materialist) we can place the theory in a much larger context.  Darwinism was not entirely new, invented out of whole cloth."  Likewise, the modern intelligent design movement can be placed in a larger context as a challenge to modern materialistic thought as enforced in modern science.

 

 

For more indepth study of the history of intelligent design, see '''William Dembski's''' work entitled ''Intelligent Design''.<ref>http://www.designinference.com/documents/2003.08.Encyc_of_Relig.htm</ref>  In particular, Dembski's bibliography and comments are reproduced here:

For more indepth study of the history of intelligent design, see '''William Dembski's''' work entitled ''Intelligent Design''.<ref>http://www.designinference.com/documents/2003.08.Encyc_of_Relig.htm</ref>  In particular, Dembski's bibliography and comments are reproduced here:

Asia is an up-and-coming ID hot spot, as ENV has reported. See here for Signature in the Cell and Explore Evolution [links omitted for Discoveroid books] in their recent and handsome Korean editions.

Asia is an up-and-coming ID hot spot, as ENV has reported. See here for Signature in the Cell and Explore Evolution [links omitted for Discoveroid books] in their recent and handsome Korean editions.

Europe and Asia aside, how about Brazil? From South America’s most populous nation, accounting for half the continent’s total population, comes news of the First Brazilian Intelligent Design Congress, scheduled for November 14-16 this year at [details of the event].<ref>[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/10/intelligent_des_20090211.html Intelligent Design's Secret Weapon: The World] by David Klinghoffer October 3, 2014 11:53 AM</ref>}}

Europe and Asia aside, how about Brazil? From South America’s most populous nation, accounting for half the continent’s total population, comes news of the First Brazilian Intelligent Design Congress, scheduled for November 14–16 this year at [details of the event].<ref>[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/10/intelligent_des_20090211.html Intelligent Design's Secret Weapon: The World] by David Klinghoffer October 3, 2014 11:53 AM</ref>}}

==Resources==

==Resources==

For a quick, concise overview of what intelligent design is all about, link to the following relatively short articles:

For a quick, concise overview of what intelligent design is all about, link to the following relatively short articles:

'''''Intelligent Design: The Scientific Alternative to Evolution'''''.<ref>http://idnetohio.cinti.net/media/NCBQ3_3HarrisCalvert.pdf</ref> Written by William S. Harris and John H. Calvert (of '''Intelligent Design Network, Inc.'''),<ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/</ref> this article is a one-stop mini-compendium on what intelligent design is, what it claims, and why it's important.

'''''Intelligent Design: The Scientific Alternative to Evolution'''''.<ref>http://idnetohio.cinti.net/media/NCBQ3_3HarrisCalvert.pdf</ref> Written by William S. Harris and John H. Calvert (of '''Intelligent Design Network, Inc.'''),<ref name="ReferenceA">http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/</ref> this article is a one-stop mini-compendium on what intelligent design is, what it claims, and why it's important.

'''''The Evolution Controversy: Understanding the Basic Issues in the Debate Between Biological Evolution and Intelligent Design'''''. By Jody F. Sjogren, Robert P. Lattimer, and Douglas D. Rudy, and presented by Science Excellence for all Ohioans (SEAO).<ref>http://www.sciohio.org/start.htm</ref> Read and understand this and you will, as the title says, understand the basic issues.

'''''The Evolution Controversy: Understanding the Basic Issues in the Debate Between Biological Evolution and Intelligent Design'''''. By Jody F. Sjogren, Robert P. Lattimer, and Douglas D. Rudy, and presented by Science Excellence for all Ohioans (SEAO).<ref>http://www.sciohio.org/start.htm</ref> Read and understand this and you will, as the title says, understand the basic issues.

'''''Intelligent Design: The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories.'''''<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&program=CSC - Scientific Research and Scholarship - Science - MainPage&id=2177</ref> By Stephen C. Meyer of the Center for Science & Culture,<ref>http://www.discovery.org/csc/</ref> this article first appeared in the peer reviewed Proceeding of the Biological Society of Washington, August 20, 2005. Dr. Meyer argues that no current materialistic theory of evolution can account for the origin of the information necessary to build novel animal forms. He proposes intelligent design as an alternative explanation for the origin of biological information and the higher taxa.

'''''Intelligent Design: The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories.'''''<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&program=CSC - Scientific Research and Scholarship - Science - MainPage&id=2177</ref> By Stephen C. Meyer of the Center for Science & Culture,<ref name="http://www.discovery.org/csc">http://www.discovery.org/csc/</ref> this article first appeared in the peer reviewed Proceeding of the Biological Society of Washington, August 20, 2005. Dr. Meyer argues that no current materialistic theory of evolution can account for the origin of the information necessary to build novel animal forms. He proposes intelligent design as an alternative explanation for the origin of biological information and the higher taxa.

===Web Based Resources===

===Web Based Resources===

====The Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture====

====The Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture====

'''The Center for Science and Culture'''<ref>http://www.discovery.org/csc/</ref> is a [[Discovery Institute|'''Discovery Institute''']] program that encourages schools to improve science education by teaching students more fully about the theory of evolution, as well as supporting the work of scholars who challenge various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory and scholars who are working on the scientific theory known as intelligent design.  

'''The Center for Science and Culture'''<ref name="http://www.discovery.org/csc"/> is a '''[[Discovery Institute]]''' program that encourages schools to improve science education by teaching students more fully about the theory of evolution, as well as supporting the work of scholars who challenge various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory and scholars who are working on the scientific theory known as intelligent design.  

In addition to scientific research and scholarship, the Center's '''Evolution News and Views''' blog<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/</ref> presents analysis of that relevant news coverage, as well as original reporting that accurately delivers information about the current state of the debate over Darwinian evolution.

In addition to scientific research and scholarship, the Center's '''Evolution News and Views''' blog<ref>http://www.evolutionnews.org/</ref> presents analysis of that relevant news coverage, as well as original reporting that accurately delivers information about the current state of the debate over Darwinian evolution.

====Access Research Network====

====Access Research Network====

The '''[[Access Research Network]] (ARN)'''<ref>http://www.arn.org/</ref>is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing accessible information on science, technology and society.

The '''[[Access Research Network]] (ARN)'''<ref name="arn.org">http://www.arn.org/</ref> is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing accessible information on science, technology and society.

'''ARN's''' articles and publications cover a host of issues which focus on such topics as intelligent design theory, genetic engineering, euthanasia, computer technology, environmental issues, creation/evolution, fetal tissue research and medical issues. ARN provides infomation needed to orient one's self in today's scientific and technological world in order to make informed decisions.

'''ARN's''' articles and publications cover a host of issues which focus on such topics as intelligent design theory, genetic engineering, euthanasia, computer technology, environmental issues, creation/evolution, fetal tissue research and medical issues. ARN provides infomation needed to orient one's self in today's scientific and technological world in order to make informed decisions.

====The Intelligent Design Network====

====The Intelligent Design Network====

'''Intelligent Design Network, Inc.'''<ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/</ref> is a nonprofit organization that seeks institutional objectivity in origins science.  Objectivity results from the use of the [[scientific method|scientific method]] without philosophic or religious assumptions in seeking answers to the question: Where do we come from?

'''Intelligent Design Network, Inc.'''<ref name="ReferenceA"/> is a nonprofit organization that seeks institutional objectivity in origins science.  Objectivity results from the use of the [[scientific method]] without philosophic or religious assumptions in seeking answers to the question: Where do we come from?

The Intelligent Design Network produced a Statement of Objectives <ref>http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Statement_of_Objectives_Feb_12_07.pdf</ref> regarding origins science. The Statement acknowledges that explanations of the origin of the universe and of life and its diversity are scientifically controversial. Further, due to its controversial nature, Origins Science  requires a scientific enterprise guided by '''scientific objectivity'' rather than a preconceived view of origins, whether Materialistic (e.g., Darwinism) or Teleological (e.g., creationism). For this reason, according to the Statement, government and public education institutions supporting Origins Science should strive for objectivity as they inform the public about the state of our scientific knowledge regarding origins.

The Intelligent Design Network produced a Statement of Objectives <ref name="intelligentdesignnetwork.org"/> regarding origins science. The Statement acknowledges that explanations of the origin of the universe and of life and its diversity are scientifically controversial. Further, due to its controversial nature, Origins Science  requires a scientific enterprise guided by '''scientific objectivity'' rather than a preconceived view of origins, whether Materialistic (e.g., Darwinism) or Teleological (e.g., creationism). For this reason, according to the Statement, government and public education institutions supporting Origins Science should strive for objectivity as they inform the public about the state of our scientific knowledge regarding origins.

====The Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) Center====

====The Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) Center====

The '''Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) Center'''<ref>http://www.ideacenter.org/</ref>is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting intelligent design theory and fostering good - spirited discussion and a better understanding over intelligent design theory and the creation - evolution issue among students, educators, churches, and anyone else interested. The Center's primary focus is to help students form "IDEA Clubs" on university and high school campuses.

The '''Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) Center'''<ref>http://www.ideacenter.org/</ref> is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting intelligent design theory and fostering good - spirited discussion and a better understanding over intelligent design theory and the creation - evolution issue among students, educators, churches, and anyone else interested. The Center's primary focus is to help students form "IDEA Clubs" on university and high school campuses.

====ID the Future====

====ID the Future====

====Uncommon Descent====

====Uncommon Descent====

The intelligent design weblog of [[William Dembski]], Denyse O'Leary, and friends, '''Uncommon Descent'''<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/</ref> holds that...

The intelligent design weblog of [[William Dembski]], Denyse O'Leary, and friends, '''Uncommon Descent'''<ref>http://www.uncommondescent.com/</ref> holds that...

Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. At the same time, intelligent design (ID) offers a promising scientific alternative to materialistic theories of biological and cosmological evolution -- an alternative that is finding increasing theoretical and empirical support. Hence, ID needs to be vigorously developed as a scientific, intellectual, and cultural project.

Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. At the same time, intelligent design (ID) offers a promising scientific alternative to materialistic theories of biological and cosmological evolution—an alternative that is finding increasing theoretical and empirical support. Hence, ID needs to be vigorously developed as a scientific, intellectual, and cultural project.

====The Post-Darwinist====

====The Post-Darwinist====

Toronto-based '''Denyse O'Leary's''' blog<ref>http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/</ref>, covering the intelligent design movement from a journalist/author's perspective.

Toronto-based '''Denyse O'Leary's''' blog,<ref>http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/</ref> covering the intelligent design movement from a journalist/author's perspective.

===Books, Tapes, DVD's===

===Books, Tapes, DVD's===

====Access Research Network====

====Access Research Network====

Books available from '''Access Research Network's'''<ref>http://www.arn.org/</ref> book catalog<ref>http://astore.amazon.com/a0ed97-20</ref> and videos/tapes (including DVD's)<ref>[http://www.arn.org/origins-101.html ARN Videos]</ref><ref>http://astore.amazon.com/a0ed97-20</ref> include the latest information on the subject of intelligent design.

Books available from '''Access Research Network's'''<ref name="arn.org"/> book catalog<ref name="astore.amazon.com">http://astore.amazon.com/a0ed97-20</ref> and videos/tapes (including DVD's)<ref name="astore.amazon.com"/><ref>[http://www.arn.org/origins-101.html ARN Videos]</ref> include the latest information on the subject of intelligent design.

==See Also==

==See also==

*[[Intelligent design movement]]

*[[Intelligent design movement]]

*[[Creation Science]]

*[[Creation Science]]

== External Links ==

== External links ==

*[http://www.intelligentdesign.org/ IntelligentDesign.org]

*[http://www.intelligentdesign.org/ IntelligentDesign.org]