Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

50 Intelligent Design peer-reviewed, scientific publications!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    http://www.discovery.org/a/2640 Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) By: Staff Discovery
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 1, 2012

      Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated)

      By: Staff
      Discovery Institute
      February 1, 2012


      Editor's Note: While intelligent design (ID) research is a new scientific field, recent years have been a period of encouraging growth, producing a strong record of peer-reviewed scientific publications.

      In 2011, the ID movement counted its 50th peer-reviewed scientific paper and new publications continue to appear.

      The current boom goes back to 2004, when Discovery Institute senior fellow Stephen Meyer published a groundbreaking paper advocating ID in the journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.

      There are multiple hubs of ID-related research.

      We provide below an annotated bibliography of technical publications of various kinds that support, develop or apply the theory of intelligent design.

      Scientific Publications Supportive of Intelligent Design Published in Peer-Reviewed Scientific Journals, Conference Proceedings, or Academic Anthologies

      > Joseph A. Kuhn, "Dissecting Darwinism," Baylor University
      > Medical Center Proceedings, Vol. 25(1): 41-47 (2012).
      > This article by Dr. Joseph Kuhn of the Department of Surgery
      > at Baylor University Medical Center appeared in the
      > peer-reviewed journal Baylor University Medical Center
      > Proceedings. It poses a number of challenges to both chemical
      > and biological evolution, including:
      > 1. Limitations of the chemical origin of life
      > data to explain the origin of DNA
      > 2. Limitations of mutation and natural selection
      > theories to address the irreducible complexity of
      > the cell
      > 3. Limitations of transitional species data to
      > account for the multitude of changes involved in
      > the transition.
      > Regarding the chemical origin of life, Kuhn points to the
      > Miller-Urey experiments and correctly observes that "the
      > experimental conditions of a low-oxygen, nitrogen-rich
      > reducing environment have been refuted." Citing Stephen
      > Meyer's Signature in the Cell, he contends that "the
      > fundamental and insurmountable problem with Darwinian
      > evolution lies in the remarkable complexity and inherent
      > information contained within DNA." Kuhn also explains that
      > "Darwinian evolution and natural selection could not have
      > been causes of the origin of life, because they require
      > replication to operate, and there was no replication prior
      > to the origin of life," but no other known cause can organize
      > the information in life.
      > Dr. Kuhn then turns to explaining the concept of irreducible
      > complexity, citing Michael Behe's book Darwin's Black Box and
      > noting that "irreducible complexity suggests that all elements
      > of a system must be present simultaneously rather than evolve
      > through a stepwise, sequential improvement, as theorized by
      > Darwinian evolution." Further, "The fact that these irreducibly
      > complex systems are specifically coded through DNA adds another
      > layer of complexity called 'specified complexity.'" As a medical
      > doctor, Kuhn proposes that irreducibly complex systems within
      > the human body include "vision, balance, the respiratory system,
      > the circulatory system, the immune system, the gastrointestinal
      > system, the skin, the endocrine system, and taste." He concludes
      > that "the human body represents an irreducibly complex system on
      > a cellular and an organ/system basis."
      > Kuhn also explores the question of human/ape common ancestry,
      > citing Jonathan Wells's book The Myth of Junk DNA and arguing:
      > DNA homology between ape and man has been reported to be 96%
      > when considering only the current protein-mapping sequences,
      > which represent only 2% of the total genome. However, the
      > actual similarity of the DNA is approximately 70% to 75% when
      > considering the full genome, including the previously presumed
      > "junk DNA," which has now been demonstrated to code for
      > supporting elements in transcription or expression. The 25%
      > difference represents almost 35 million single nucleotide
      > changes and 5 million insertions or deletions.
      > In Dr. Kuhn's view, this poses a problem for Darwinian evolution
      > because the "[t]he ape to human species change would require an
      > incredibly rapid rate of mutation leading to formation of new
      > DNA, thousands of new proteins, and untold cellular, neural,
      > digestive, and immune-related changes in DNA, which would code
      > for the thousands of new functioning proteins."
      > Kuhn also observes that a challenge to neo-Darwinism comes from
      > the Cambrian explosion:
      > Thousands of specimens were available at the time of Darwin.
      > Millions of specimens have been classified and studied in the
      > past 50 years. It is remarkable to note that each of these shows
      > a virtual explosion of nearly all phyla (35/40) of the animal
      > kingdom over a relatively short period during the Cambrian era
      > 525 to 530 million years ago. Since that time, there has been
      > occasional species extinction, but only rare new phyla have
      > been convincingly identified. The seminal paper from
      > paleoanthropologists J. Valentine and D. H. Erwin notes that
      > the absence of transitional species for any of the Cambrian
      > phyla limits the neo-Darwinian explanation for evolution.
      > Despite Texas's call for discussing the scientific strengths
      > and weaknesses of Darwinian evolution, Kuhn closes by noting,
      > "In 2011, when new textbooks were presented to the State Board
      > of Education, 9 out of 10 failed to provide the mandated
      > supplementary curricula, which would include both positive and
      > negative aspects of evolution (44)." Citing Discovery Institute's
      > Report on the Texas Textbooks, he laments:
      > [S]everal of the textbooks continued to incorrectly promote
      > the debunked Miller-Urey origin of life experiment, the
      > long-discredited claims about nonfunctional appendix and
      > tonsils, and the fraudulent embryo drawings from Ernst Haeckel.
      > In essence, current biology students, aspiring medical students,
      > and future scientists are not being taught the whole story.
      > Rather, evidence suggests that they continue to receive
      > incorrect and incomplete material that exaggerates the effect
      > of random mutation and natural selection to account for DNA,
      > the cell, or the transition from species to species.
      > Kuhn concludes, "It is therefore time to sharpen the minds of
      > students, biologists, and physicians for the possibility of a
      > new paradigm."

      (Go to link for other 49 references.-RLBaty)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.