Intelligent Design

From a silly Photoshop contest at CRACKED magazine (I read it so you don't have to, okay?) comes this reader-submitted masterpiece. Ah, now that explains much about our universe! The frigid, lifeless gulfs of infinite space... the murderous cataclysms of our own planet... its trackless dry wastes and unsurvivable polar regions... flesh-eating bacteria... brain-devouring viruses... our own greed, bloodlust, and savagery... With Cthulhu properly identified as the Inhumane Designer, we no longer have to ask whether mankind's miseries point to an evil God. Now we know.

Besides, what but an Inhumane Designer explains the sanity-rending aesthetic ugliness riddling creation, crawling just below its patina of butterflies and puppies? I'm looking at you, arachnid faces, tumescent monkey butts, and human feet. No, wait, I'm not looking at you. AHHHH! Go away!!

Dang it, another "Death of Darwinism" prediction has up and fizzled. In Death of "molecular Darwinism" imminent! I noted ID luminary William Dembski's prognostication:

In the next five years, molecular Darwinism — the idea that Darwinian processes can produce complex molecular structures at the subcellular level — will be dead. When that happens, evolutionary biology will experience a crisis of confidence because evolutionary biology hinges on the evolution of the right molecules. 

That grim portent came from the July/August 2004 issue of Touchstone magazine, and even allowing a generous deadline of the end of August, 2009, the five-year clock has run out while "molecular Darwinism" is still dancing a merry jig. (Come on, Doctor Dembski, when you give a patient a fixed time to live, at least have the decency to kill him off if he persists in surviving!)

Are there more prophecies to track? Dembski still has the meter running on a 10-year claim for the "Taliban-style collapse of Darwinism"; let's check on that in 2014. But what else do we have? Readeth thou more

Sure, the "atheists discredited" prediction didn't come to pass by its deadline of February this year. But fear not, for the faithful have another chance at prophetic jackpot waiting in the heavenly wings. 

I stumbled across another prediction over at The Panda's Thumb, via a 2004 post on Pharyngula. This one comes from famed Intelligent Design (née Creationism) proponent William A. Dembski, in a Touchstone Magazine interview: 

Touchstone: Where is the ID movement going in the next ten years?  What new issues will it be exploring, and what new challenges will it be offering Darwinism?

Dembski: In the next five years, molecular Darwinism — the idea that Darwinian processes can produce complex molecular structures at the subcellular level — will be dead. When that happens, evolutionary biology will experience a crisis of confidence because evolutionary biology hinges on the evolution of the right molecules. I therefore foresee a Taliban-style collapse of Darwinism in the next ten years. Intelligent design will of course profit greatly from this. For ID to win the day, however, will require talented new researchers able to move this research program forward, showing how intelligent design provides better insights into biological systems than the dying Darwinian paradigm.

– (Anonymous (Touchstone Magazine), (July/August 2004).  “The Measure of Design: A conversation about the past, present & future of Darwinism and Design.”  Touchstone, 17(6), pp. 60-65.)

A little background for those not up on their devotional readings: Readeth thou more

Intelligent Design is warmed-over creationism says PZ Myers, and of course he's right. Once again, a nutcase is claiming "Creationism and Intelligent Design are two completely different ways of looking at the world" – when the only difference is that proponents of the latter try to make Creationist mush palatable by invoking science-y words and by being careful not to say "God" when outsiders are listening.

But alas, they keep making their private whispers public. Read the Pharyngula article for a great run-down of Intelligent Design proponents caught in the act of admitting that their Magic Designer is none other than the Abrahamic god of Bronze-Age Middle Eastern cults. It's good to keep these instances in mind, as we'll continue to hear public protests of "God? Who said God?" from the IDists.

My own take on the matter? Intelligent Design is Creationism with flame decals. Nothing more. 

Ars Technica reports on February proceedings at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, on the topic "Communicating Science in a Religious America". http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/communicating-science-polarized-...

An interesting bit from Ken Miller, Brown University cellular biologist, on combating Intelligent Design. Specifically, he addresses how to counter the doubt over Darwinian evolution created by ID's tactic of portraying it as an improbable "chain of accidents". Readeth thou more