Intelligent Design | Page 232 | Discovery Institute

Virtualization of Understanding — Photo by agsandrew on Adobe Stock

^{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

36}

Philosophical Objections to Intelligent Design

_{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

36}

I. Is Intelligent Design Falsifiable? Some reviewers of Darwin’s Black Box (Behe 1996) have raised philosophical objections to intelligent design. I will discuss several of these over the next few sections, beginning with the question of falsifiability. To decide whether, or by what evidence, it is falsifiable, one first has to be sure what is meant by “intelligent design.” By Read More ›

^{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design, Research & Analysis

31}

In Defense of the Irreducibility of the Blood Clotting Cascade

_{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design, Research & Analysis

31}

In Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution I devoted a chapter to the mechanism of blood clotting, arguing that it is irreducibly complex and therefore a big problem for Darwinian evolution. Since my book came out, as far as I am aware there have been no papers published in the scientific literature giving a detailed scenario or experiments to show how natural selection could have built the system. However three scientists publishing outside science journals have attempted to respond. Read More ›

^{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

15}

“A True Acid Test”

_{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

15}

In this essay I reply to what I consider to be the most important claim made by any critic of intelligent design: that direct experimental evidence has shown that evolution can indeed generate irreducibly complex biochemical systems. As I will show below, the claim is false. Read More ›

Stack of documents with paper clips on office table. Space for text

^{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

20}

Irreducible Complexity and the Evolutionary Literature

_{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

20}

Although several persons have cited numerous references from the scientific literature purporting to show that the problem of irreducible complexity I pointed out in Darwin's Black Box is being seriously addressed, the references show no such thing. Read More ›

minimalistic yellow background with a mousetrap and a piece of tasty cheese

^{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

22}

A Mousetrap Defended

_{Michael J. Behe
July 31, 2000
Intelligent Design

22}

In Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution I coined the term "irreducible complexity" in order to point out an apparent problem for the Darwinian evolution of some biochemical and cellular systems. In brief, an irreducibly complex system is one that needs several well-matched parts, all working together, to perform its function. Read More ›

^{Charles Colson
July 24, 2000
Intelligent Design

3}

Fences for Tearing Down

_{Charles Colson
July 24, 2000
Intelligent Design

3}

Suppose you woke up tomorrow morning to find that your neighbor had moved his chain-link fence all the way across your yard—right up against your door. So you call him on the phone. "What's up with the fence?" you ask. Read More ›

^{Michael J. Behe
July 21, 2000
Intelligent Design

28}

Science Friday, Scopes Trial 75th Anniversary, part 2

_{Michael J. Behe
July 21, 2000
Intelligent Design

28}

To hear in Real Audio go to “http://www.sciencefriday.com/” Correction: This published transcript incorrectly attributes some remarks to Ed Larson that were actually said by Ken Miller. End correction FLATOW: Now joining me to talk some more about the theory of evolution and maybe how it should be taught in schools are my next guests. Kenneth Miller is a cell biologist Read More ›

^{Mike Gene
July 10, 2000
Intelligent Design

9}

Miller and Behe on Origins

_{Mike Gene
July 10, 2000
Intelligent Design

9}

Ken Miller is a scientist who has been taking the lead as a critic of ID. Thus, I took a look at his review of Behe’s book, Darwin’s Black Box, found at http://biomed.brown.edu/Faculty/M/Miller/Behe.html There is really nothing in this review that I have not already replied to in [the ARN] forum. But there is one thing worth exploring in more Read More ›

Francis Collins, M.D., Ph.D., now director of the NIH, stands to the right of then-President Bill Clinton (J. Craig Ventner, Ph.D., left) at the announcement that an international consortuim had completed the first

^{Nancy Pearcey
July 8, 2000
Human Exceptionalism, Intelligent Design

4}

Genome Project Raises Fears, Hopes

_{Nancy Pearcey
July 8, 2000
Human Exceptionalism, Intelligent Design

4}

Two rival groups of scientists have announced that the race to decode the human genome has ended-in a tie. J. Craig Venter, president of Celera Genomics, and Francis S. Collins, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, joined in a White House ceremony on June 26 to announce that they’ve deciphered the human hereditary script. The two organizations had Read More ›

^{Michael J. Behe
July 7, 2000
Intelligent Design

2}

Intelligent Design Is Not Creationism

_{Michael J. Behe
July 7, 2000
Intelligent Design

2}

Scott refers to me as an intelligent design "creationist," even though I clearly write in my book Darwin's Black Box (which Scott cites) that I am not a creationist and have no reason to doubt common descent. In fact, my own views fit quite comfortably with the 40% of scientists that Scott acknowledges think "evolution occurred, but was guided by God." Where I and others run afoul of Scott and the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) is simply in arguing that intelligent design in biology is not invisible, it is empirically detectable. Read More ›