1,106
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 9:
Line 9: − + + − + − − − :Watches prove human designers. By the same token, humans (which are infinitely more sophisticated than watches) prove an Intelligent Designer. − − Other Intelligent Design advocates propose the "eye" as a problem for evolution. − :What good is part of an eye? Seeing is binary, you can or you cannot. Darwinian evolution cannot explain how an eye can evolve, because only a whole eye, entire, is of any utility. − − :Eyes prove Intelligent Designers. Without the craftsmanship of the divine, there wouldn't be the fine-ness and diversity of creation. −
sourcing claim...how is this for wording?
In a speech to the Anti-Defamation League, Jones said that "had I decided the Dover matter in a different way, I would have then engaged in just the kind of judicial activism which critics decry," stating that he was bound by "over a half century of strong legal precedents."[http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/speech_judge_jones.asp]
In a speech to the Anti-Defamation League, Jones said that "had I decided the Dover matter in a different way, I would have then engaged in just the kind of judicial activism which critics decry," stating that he was bound by "over a half century of strong legal precedents."[http://www.adl.org/Civil_Rights/speech_judge_jones.asp]
== Evidence ==
== Evidence ==
One of the first major books with evidence for intelligent design was [[Michael J. Behe]]'s. Behe is a Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University. He alleges in "Darwin's Black Box" [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684834936/thetalkorigin-20/] that there are certain ''irreducible complexities'' which can only be addressed by an intelligent designer.
One of the first major books with evidence for intelligent design was [[Michael J. Behe]]'s. Behe is a Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University. He alleges in "Darwin's Black Box" [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684834936/thetalkorigin-20/] that there are certain ''irreducible complexities'' which can only be addressed by an intelligent designer. Most scientist who reviewed Behe's book felt that the structures he defined could evolve through the mechanisms of naturalist evolution and that the evidence provided was not convincing. [http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Catalano/box/nature.shtml]
== Analogies ==
== Analogies ==
Many Intelligent Design advocates propose the "watch" analogy.
Many Intelligent Design advocates propose the "watch" analogy.
:Imagine one is walking along a beach and suddenly encounters a wrist-watch. Given its vast sophistication vis-a-vis its environment, and the obvious non-random care with which it was made, does the wrist-watch pre-suppose an Intelligent Designer?
:Imagine one is walking along a beach and suddenly encounters a wrist-watch. Given its relative sophistication vis-a-vis its environment, and the obvious non-random care with which it was made, does the wrist-watch pre-suppose an Intelligent Designer?
== External Link ==
== External Link ==
[http://www.researchintelligentdesign.org/wiki/Main_Page ResearchID.org]
[http://www.researchintelligentdesign.org/wiki/Main_Page ResearchID.org]