Intelligent Design

Intelligent Design

Dr. Heinz Lycklama

[email protected]

www.osta.com

All truth passes through three stages:1. Ridicule 2. Violent opposition3. Self-evident acceptance.

Arthur Schopenhauer

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.osta.com/

@ Dr. Heinz Lycklama

Chance, Necessity or Design?


Intelligent Design What is it? History of “Intelligent Design” Key movers and shakers Irreducible complexity Specified complexity Testing for complexity Arguments for a designer More examples of design Intelligent Design v. Creationism


What is Intelligent Design? "The theory of intelligent design holds that

certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."

Source: The Discovery Institute

The leaders in the ID movement purposely do not equate the intelligent cause with God;

moreover, they are agnostic on the issue of the age of the earth and of the universe


Scientific Creationism Propositions There was a sudden creation of the universe, energy

and life from nothing Mutations and natural selection lack ability to

develop all living kinds from a single organism Changes of the originally created kinds of plants

and animals occur only within fixed limits There is a separate ancestry for humans and apes Earth’s geology can be explained by catastrophism,

primarily by the occurrence of a worldwide flood Earth and living kinds had a relatively recent

beginning (6000 -> 10,000 years ago)


Intelligent Design Propositions Specified complexity and irreducible complexity

are reliable indications of design Biological systems exhibit specified complexity

and use irreducibly complex subsystems Naturalistic mechanisms or undirected causes do

not suffice to explain origin of complexity Intelligent design constitutes the best explanation

for the origin of specified complexity and irreducible complexity in biological systems


Evidence for Design Cosmology: evidence suggests the

universe--including all matter, space, time, and energy--came suddenly into existence a finite time ago, contradicting the picture of an eternal and self-existing material cosmos

Physics: evidence has shown that the universe is "finely-tuned" for the existence of life, suggesting the work, as Astrophysicist Fred Hoyle puts it, "of a super-intellect”


Evidence for Design - 2 Biology: the presence of complex and

functionally integrated machines has cast doubt on Darwinian mechanisms of self-assembly

Molecular biology: the presence of information encoded along the DNA molecule has suggested the activity of a prior designing intelligence

Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin urges scientists to embrace a "materialism [that] is

absolute" and to stick with "material explanations, no matter how counter intuitive."


History of Intelligent Design Greek philosophers a few

100 years before Christ Some early church fathers

in 3rd/4th centuries William Paley, Natural Theology (1802)

Watch is the product of intelligence (watchmaker), not the result of undirected natural processes

Organisms (e.g. the eye) are the product of intelligence

Purposeful design -> purposeful designer Important sign of design is complexity


An Early Argument From Design

Rev. William Paley in Natural Theology, 1802:

"In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone and were asked how the stone came to be there, I might possibly answer that for anything I knew to the contrary it had lain there forever; nor would it, perhaps, be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place, I should hardly think of the answer which I had before given, that for anything I knew the watch might have always been there. Yet why should not this answer serve for the watch as well as for the stone? For this reason, and none other, viz., that when we come to inspect the watch, we perceive what we could not discover in the stone, that its several parts were put together for a purpose."


Modern Intelligent Design (ID) Began with the work of Charles Thaxton, Walter

Bradley, Michael Denton, Dean Kenyon and Phillip Johnson Scientifically, Darwinism is an inadequate

framework for biology Philosophically, Darwinism is hopelessly entangled

with naturalism Michael Behe, William Dembski, Stephen Meyer,

Paul Nelson and Jonathan Wells Proposed positive research program wherein

intelligent causes become key for understanding the diversity and complexity of life


Some Influential ID Books The Mystery of Life’s Origin, Charles Thaxton

et. al. in 1984 A Theory in Crisis, Michael Denton in 1986 Darwin on Trial, Phillip Johnson in 1991 Creation Hypothesis, Dean Kenyon in 1994 Reason in the Balance, Phillip Johnson in 1995 Darwin’s Black Box, Michael Behe in 1996 The Design Inference, William Dembski in 1999 Icons of Evolution, Jonathan Wells in 2000 The Design Revolution, William Dembski in 2004


Can Evolution be Proved in a Courtroom?

Phillip E. JohnsonJefferson E. Peyser

Professor of LawSchool of Law

University of California, Berkeleyhttp://www.arn.org/johnson/johome.htm

A Lawyer’s Perspective

Published in 1991


Johnson’s Critique Spreads This 1994 collection

of philosophers, physicists, astronomers, chemists, biologists, and linguists critiqued Darwinism and promoted Intelligent Design


Johnson’s Influence Leads to 1996 Conference

This conference at Biola University brought scholars from around the world

The world learns of the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC).


Darwin’s Black Box

Lehigh U. biochemistry professor, Mike Behe’s 1996 book was reviewed in mainline science journals.

For the first time Darwinists only argued with his conclusions, not his facts.

CT’s 1996 Book of the Year.


Irreducible Complexity Mike Behe introduced the concept of

irreducible complexity in his book, Darwin’s Black Box

Something is irreducibly complex if it is composed of two or more necessary parts

Remove one part and function is not just impaired but destroyed

A mousetrap is irreducibly complex


The Mousetrap

•A mousetrap cannot be built by natural selection


The Mousetrap – An Explanation

“An everyday example of an irreducibly complex system is the humble mousetrap. It consists of (1) a flat wooden platform or base; (2) a metal hammer, which crushes the mouse; (3) a spring with extended ends to power the hammer; (4) a catch that releases the spring; and (5) a metal bar that connects to the catch and holds the hammer back. You can't catch a mouse with just a platform, then add a spring and catch a few more mice, then add a holding bar and catch a few more. All the pieces have to be in place before you catch any mice.”

Michael Behe - 2002


“Irreducible Complexity” “By irreducibly complex I mean a single system

composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning

An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly... by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional”

Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, p. 39.


Johnson and Behe Meet the Press

Both Behe and Johnson began speaking and debating on major university campuses

Both also began writing articles and editorials for the WSJ, Washington Post and other major media outlets

Johnson appeared on Nightline


William Dembski Bill Dembski publishes

The Design Inference in 1999 with the prestigious Cambridge University Press.

Bill has earned doctorates in philosophy and mathematics and an M.Div. from Princeton.


1999 Is a Pivotal Year Kansas Board of Education reduces the

influence of naturalism in high school biology standards

Education and scientific establishments vastly overreact

Johnson, Behe, Dembski, and others are published widely, exposing the naturalistic bias of science and media

Darwinists only repeat tired, predictable science vs. religion arguments


Year 2000

Dembski publishes Intelligent Design

Major conferences at Baylor, Concordia College in Wisconsin, and Yale.

Media and scientific community focus even more attention on Kansas.


Year 2000


Intelligent Design Theory

Living organisms are too complicated to be the result of natural processes working independently

Based largely on the theories underlying Information Theory

Concerned with measuring the complexity of structures/information contained in structures

Generally concerned with two main concepts: Irreducible complexity Specified complexity


Specific Complexity The following strings of characters illustrate the concept of

Specific Complexity.

Consider the following:

Complex but unspecified: “fjbn ghtur ieiod ofjkgjbn mfkritj”

Complex and specified: “The state of education in America”


Intelligent Design

“Intelligent Design” (ID) takes intelligence to be a separate principle, not reducible to chance and necessity.

Targets evolution: life exhibits a special kind of order, not like that of a snowflake but like that of a meaningful message.

Sophisticated anti-evolution. No Bible-thumping. Philosophical.


ID: A Separate Principle

F Gm1m2

r122

++

Chance

Necessity

Design


“Irreducible Complexity”

1996: Michael Behe, Lehigh biochemist. Leading ID biologist. Catholic.

Common descent OK––against Darwinian mechanism. Can’t get “irreducible complexity.”


“Specified complexity”

1998-now: William Dembski, mathematician and philosopher. Leading theorist of ID.

ID irreducible form of explanation, distinct from chance & necessity.

ID is a revolution.


Books, Books, More Books

• Dembski has 3 books, 4+ edited books on ID

• Not just biology but physics, AI, theology, morality, law, …

• Broad, “information-theoretic” objections to naturalistic evolution


Dembski’s claims Both designed artifacts and organisms

exhibit special order: specified complexity Chance and necessity cannot generate

Specified Complexity, or information Intelligence is a separate principle Blind mechanisms (like those of Darwinian

evolution) cannot explain life Artificial Intelligence is impossible


How To Detect Specified Complexity

Contingency: No physical constraint; all sorts of strings can appear on the paper

Complexity: Improbable to obtain by pure chance

Specification: Can’t read it, but fits properties of a language, priorly known DNA also a code…

Günaydinlar! Bugün hava iyi,ancak yarin dahakötü olacak gibi.Bulut çok, ama neyapar, belli degil.


Testing for Design

Günaydinlar!

Bugün hava iyi,

ancak yarin daha

kötü olacak gibi.

Bulut çok, ama ne

yapar, belli degil.F G

m1m2

r12

contingency

contingency

complexity

specifi-

cation


NoNo

ChanceChance

NoNo

Specified/Small probability?

Specified/Small probability?

NoNo

Intermediateprobability?Intermediateprobability?

Highlyprobable?

Highlyprobable?

William Dembski’sExplanatory Filter

From Mere Creation: Science, Faith and Intelligent Design. William A. Dembski Ed. Downers Grove,

Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1998. P99.

StartStart

LawLawYesYes

YesYes ChanceChance

YesYes DesignDesign


Is The Pattern Random Or Designed?

Probability:

=2-256

=8.6 x 10-78

=0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000086

Arguments for a DesignerOrganisms look designed for at least three reasons: Redundancy - A Designer can engineer redundancy into a

system, but chance is unlikely to do this. An example of this is the presence of degeneracy in the genetic code and other features that minimize or negate the effects of many point mutations

Excess potential - Organisms have potential that may never be used. For example, Wallace, co-discoverer of natural selection, pointed out that primitive people have the capacity to do calculus when trained. Natural selection is unlikely to select for capacity that is not used

Complexity - Life exhibits a kind of complexity that it is hard to produce by processes involving chance

Design and Deductive Reasoning

In general, arguments for a designer are arguments against the alternative. This does not mean these are just arguments against evolutionary theory. All arguments, by definition, are characterized by taking one side while arguing against another side

Arguments against a theory are about eliminating possible explanations. There is nothing inferior about this, in fact, it is deductive reasoning which is used by scientists all the time in their quest for truth


The Likely and the Unlikely Arguments for a Designer frequently revolve

around probability. Meaningful complexity is unlikely to result from random events. Organisms are meaningfully complex. Some claim that natural selection overcomes much of this problem as, while change may be random, selection is not

Science is about predicting whatis likely and what is unlikely. Everyone is in agreement that the events leading to production of living organisms are unlikely

In a Long Time and Big Universe

It has been argued that given massive lengths of time and a universe to work in, the unlikely becomes likely: “Given infinite time, or infinite opportunities, anything is possible.

The large numbers proverbially furnished by astronomy, and the large time spans characteristic of geology, combine to turn topsy-turvy our everyday estimates of what is expected and what is miraculous.” Richard Dawkins (1989) The Blind Watchmaker: Why the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design. W. W. Norton and Co. New York. p139.

Dawkins says that while life looks designed, the designer was not God, but massive chance coupled with natural selection. Nature was the designer

In The Panda’s Thumb, Stephen J. Gould argues that life does not look designed

Little or Big Changes? Not all changes improve fitness, they may:

Improve the fitness of an organism (very unlikely) Be neutral, having no effect on fitness Be detrimental, decreasing an organisms fitness (most likely)

The bigger the change the more likely it is to be significantly detrimental

Darwin argued that evolution is the accumulation of many small changes that improve fitness, big changes are unlikely to result in improved fitness.

“Many large groups of facts are intelligible only on the principle that species have been evolved by very small steps.” The Origin of Species Chapter VII under “Reasons for disbelieving in

great and abrupt modifications”


More Examples Necessity/law/order

Snowflake Crystal

Design – irreducible/specified complexity Animal cell Molecular motors Human eye Bombardier beetle


Molecular Machines Behe showed that the

cell, Darwin’s Black Box, is filled with irreducibly complex molecular machines that could not be built by natural selection

David Hume criticized Paley’s watchmaker argument because it was not an exact enough analogy


Molecular Machines (cont’d)

Over 100 molecular motors are now known to exist inside the cell with very specific analogies to human designed motors.

Board

Behe’s Insight Michael Behe contends that when we look at

the protein machines that run cells, there is a point at which no parts can be removed and still have a functioning machine. He called these machines “irreducibly complex” (IC)

We encounter irreducibly complex devices in everyday life. A simple mouse trap is an example of an irreducibly complex device:

HammerSpring

Trigger

Bait holder

CheeseStaple


Evolution of Complex Organs The Origin of Species

Chapter VI "Difficultiesof the Theory"

Organs of Extreme Perfectionand Complication “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable

contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correcting of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”


Evolution of the Eye To go from nothing to an eye would be a

very big jump Darwin proposed a series of what appeared

to be relatively small steps (they are still gigantic leaps) that might be able to produce an eye


The Bombardier Beetle

Could this system evolve one step at a time? All of it is programmed in the beetle’s DNA. Unless all the parts are present, the whole system is useless. Even if all the parts were present, if any one of them did not work right, the beetle’s ancestors might have exploded!

An ordinary looking beetlewith an extraordinary defense mechanism


Intelligent Design (ID) Uses an “explanatory filter”

Necessity – did it have to happen? Chance – did it happen by accident? Design – did an intelligent agent cause it to

happen? ID theory focuses on what is designed

without answering the questions of who, when, why and how


Some ID Observations ID confronts naturalistic philosophical

underpinnings of evolutionary thinking ID identifies presuppositions of naturalism ID is supported by science ID Does not assume young universe ID is not Creationism ID does not mention the Fall


Issues with Intelligent Design ID does not attempt to explain all designs

Only certain features are designed Does not rule out evolutionary processes

ID does not oppose an old age for the earth ID does not acknowledge God as redeemer ID distances itself from the problem of evil ID movement does not identify Designer/Creator ID divorces the Creator from creation


Closing Thoughts on ID

Alternative theory to Darwinian Evolution? Alternative to Creationism? Should it be taught in public schools?

Critical thinking is needed Presuppositions must be stated Church-state issue? Academic freedom is at stake


The Latest From Kansas

The Kansas standards say there is a lack of evidence or natural explanation for the genetic code, charge that fossil records are inconsistent with evolutionary theory, and say certain evolutionary explanations "often reflect ... inferences from indirect or circumstantial evidence."

Reuters News Story, August 2, 2006


Thank you for your

attention!

Dr. Heinz Lycklama

[email protected]

www.osta.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.osta.com/


Creation Organizations ICR – Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org Books by Henry Morris (founder), e.g.

The Genesis Flood The Genesis Record The Modern Creation Trilogy

Acts and Facts articles on Creation Answers in Genesis

www.answersingenesis.org Founded by Ken Ham Books, seminars, articles on Creation

http://www.icr.org/

http://www.answersingenesis.org/


Creation Organizations - 2 Creation Evidence Museum

www.creationevidence.org Dinosaurs and human tracks

Creation Moments www.creationmoments.com Radio spots

Creation Research Society www.creationresearch.org Publication of peer-reviewed creation articles

http://www.creationevidence.org/

http://www.creationmoments.com/

http://www.creationresearch.org/


Creation Organizations - 3 Center For Scientific Creation

www.creationscience.com “In The Beginning” Book by Walt Brown, Ph.D.

Creation Science Evangelism www.drdino.com Videos, seminars

Discovery Institute www.discovery.org Intelligent Design “Think Tank”

http://www.creationscience.com/

http://www.drdino.com/

http://www.discovery.org/


Important Books The Genesis Record, Dr. Henry Morris The Genesis Flood, Dr. John Whitcomb & Dr. Henry

Morris The Collapse of Evolution, Scott Huse The Lie: Evolution, Ken Ham Refuting Evolution, Dr. Jonathon Sarfati Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No!, Dr. Duane Gish Scientific Creationism, Dr. Henry Morris Starlight and Time, Dr. Russell Humphreys Dinosaurs by Design, Dr. Duane Gish


Important Books - 2 The Young Earth, Dr. John Morris Science and the Bible, Dr. Henry Morris Tornado in a Junkyard, James Perloff In The Beginning, Dr. Walt Brown Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Michael Denton Darwin on Trial, Dr. Phillip Johnson Darwin’s Black Box, Dr. Michael Behe Design Inference, Dr. William Dembski


Backup Slides


Certain bacteria swim by means of rotary flagella. These are driven by reversible electric motors!

Certain bacteria swim by means of rotary flagella. These are driven by reversible electric motors!

Bacterial Motors


Bacterial Motors - 2

IC Protein Machines Cells are full of irreducibly complex (IC) devices -

little protein machines that work only if all the parts (proteins) are present and arranged correctly

Natural selection does not provide a plausible mechanism to get from nothing to the collection of parts necessary to run a number of irreducibly complex protein machines vital to living cells

Evolution of these protein machines must occur in single big steps, not gradually, as to be selected a protein must be functional in some way. Each protein machine is fairly complex, thus evolution in a single step seems unlikely


Cilia and Flagella Cilia and Flagella are examples of irreducibly

complex protein machines Both cilia and flagella are found in the simplest

eukaryotic organisms, single celled protists, as well as much more complex animals. Some members of the plant kingdom also have flagella

As complicated structures are thought to have evolved only once, evolutionary theory suggests flagella evolved in a very ancient common ancestor of modern plant and animal cells


Components of Flagella and Cilia Flagella and cilia are made of a number of different

protein components: Three types of microtubuals - singlet, doublet, and

triplet - composed of and tubulin Nexin to separate the tubuals Protein spokes connecting tubuals to maintain a

constant diameter Spoke heads Dynein arms that interact with adjacent microtubuals A basal plate

Each of these components must be present if the flagella or cilia is to work.


Flagella Parts

Central microtubuals

Microtubual doublet Plasma

membrane

Dynein armsRadial spokes


Are Little Jumps Possible? Cilia or flagella, missing any single part will not bend, they

are thus irreducibly complex Parts having functions enhancing fitness independent of a

role in locomotion, after developing some functionality, could evolve via random change and natural selection

Microtubuals are an important part of the cytoskeleton of all eukaryotic cells, thus they could evolve independently

No other protein components of cilia and flagella have known functions independent of their role in movement

Thus, all proteins, other than tubulin in microtubuals, would have to spontaneously come into existence simultaneously if they were to increase fitness and be selected.

That seems like a big jump!


There Is More Cilia and flagella represent the tip of the iceberg

of our current understanding of the little machines that make up cells. Our current understanding of how cells function is still fragmentary, but even in this limited set of knowledge, numerous examples of irreducible complexity exist

Irreducible complexity at the biochemical level represents a powerful challenge to the theory that natural selection can account for the origin of modern living organisms

Intelligent Design

Documents

Transcript of Intelligent Design