“Information is what runs the show in biology. The question is what is the source of the digital information found in DNA?” Stephen Meyer argues that only intelligence can produce information.
Check out his argument here:
In this video clip, Dr. Stephen Meyer explains just how improbable Darwinian Evolution really is:
Check out the Darwin’s Dilemma website for more information.
“Science will eventually explain the gaps in our current knowledge of the physical universe; Intelligent Design is nothing more than an argument from ignorance.”
First of all, let me affirm that humanity has greatly benefited from ethically practiced science. But in this case I think you have misunderstood the claim that proponents of Intelligent Design (ID) are making. ID is not an argument from what we don’t know, but an inference from what we do know. When it comes to explaining any structure or phenomena in the physical world, we have three basic options: (1) Physical Necessity, (2) Chance, or (3) Design. So, for example, if hikers come across Mt. Rushmore they have a choice to make as to how this curious rock formation occurred. Is this pattern here because of some law of nature (i.e., it had to be this way)? No. Could random forces like wind and erosion produce this given enough time? No. The first two options are ruled out because they are not reasonable inferences to draw. But this rock formation has faces on it that correspond to four American presidents. These rock faces fit an independent pattern and indicate design. Just as it is entirely reasonable for an archeologist to distinguish between a rock and an arrowhead using the process above so to the molecular biologist is justified to infer design when looking at the language and information contained in DNA. Our repeated experience tells us that information is always the product of a mind. So ID is not an argument from ignorance, but an argument from evidence.
“A New Film, Alleged, Tells the Real Story of the Scopes Trial. It would be hard to underestimate the power that one film, Inherit the Wind, has had in shaping — and distorting — the evolution debate. In a comment that would be hilarious if it weren’t so pathetic, Judge John E. Jones of Kitzmiller v. Dover fame explained that in getting himself up to speed for the trial he watched ITW to get a sense of the “historical context.” What if someone made a dramatic film that actually told the truth about the Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925?”
Someone just did.
Discover the truth, order the DVD today:
Lennox discusses ways of interpreting scripture that don’t compromise its authority. “I don’t want to say anything less than what scripture says, but I don’t want to say anything more,” says Lennox. Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University and Fellow of Mathematics and the Philosophy of Science at Green Templeton College, Lennox has lectured on science and religion and related themes around the world.
Listen to his interview at ID the Future
